From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 15 06:59:04 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B496716A40F for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:59:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cperciva@freebsd.org) Received: from pd4mo2so.prod.shaw.ca (shawidc-mo1.cg.shawcable.net [24.71.223.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9870143D4C for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:59:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cperciva@freebsd.org) Received: from pd2mr5so.prod.shaw.ca (pd2mr5so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.141.8]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0J5M00G9LGQ97D40@l-daemon> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 00:58:57 -0600 (MDT) Received: from pn2ml1so.prod.shaw.ca ([10.0.121.145]) by pd2mr5so.prod.shaw.ca (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0J5M001Y6GQ9RLC0@pd2mr5so.prod.shaw.ca> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 00:58:57 -0600 (MDT) Received: from hexahedron.daemonology.net ([24.82.18.31]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with SMTP id <0J5M00M2XGQ8VZQ0@l-daemon> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 00:58:57 -0600 (MDT) Received: (qmail 62411 invoked from network); Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:58:47 +0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:58:47 +0000 Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 23:58:46 -0700 From: Colin Percival In-reply-to: To: ke han , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-id: <450A4F26.3020702@freebsd.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 References: User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060416) Cc: Subject: Re: portsdb -Uu X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:59:04 -0000 ke han wrote: > I am using > portsnap fetch > portsnap update > > to sync my ports tree on FreeBSd 6.1...it seems it maintains an index > when I run update. Yes. > I am used to using: > portsversion and portsupdate to upgrade ports...in this method I have > also used > portsdb -Uu > to rebuild an index anytime prior to running these commands...yes > portsdb takes a while and I've always wondered if this is necessary > prior to running any of these commands.. portsdb -Uu does two things: 1. It rebuilds the ports INDEX. This is done by "portsdb -U" and takes a long time. 2. It rebuilds the ports INDEX.db database. This is done by "portsdb -u", takes only a few seconds, and is done automatically when you run portupgrade if the database is out of date. > So my question is: Is the index being maintained by portsnap the same > or a replacement to that used by portupgrade? Do I have to maintain > both sets of indexes in order to use portsupdate?? The ports INDEX file generated by "portsdb -U" is the same file as portsnap generates. Since the INDEX.db database is generated automatically, this means there is no need to run portsdb between running portsnap and running portupgrade. My standard ports update/upgrade procedure is: portsnap fetch portsnap update pkg_version -vIL= # this is equivalent to "portversion -vL=" portupgrade -a Colin Percival