Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 16:39:37 -0400 From: "Joachim Rosenfeld" <joerosenfeld@gmail.com> To: "Derek Buttineau" <derek@csolve.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rsync'able ports tree instead of csup? Message-ID: <6e5cf6a70805131339s34c60d79pe5934c66381ebc13@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <E976146B-C6E3-4D93-BEE6-887FD60ED65F@csolve.net> References: <6e5cf6a70805131027i3f7286d0jadacbab8f862b101@mail.gmail.com> <E976146B-C6E3-4D93-BEE6-887FD60ED65F@csolve.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 1:46 PM, Derek Buttineau <derek@csolve.net> wrote: > Have you tried using portsnap? It's a binary snapshot of the ports tree: > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/handbook/portsnap.html Awesome, this is exactly what I was looking for. I don't suppose there is something analagous to portsnap for the source tree? It doesn't matter all that much because I don't update /usr/src all that open, so running csup(1) when a new version comes out is not a terribly big pain. thanks, Joe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6e5cf6a70805131339s34c60d79pe5934c66381ebc13>