Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 15:25:25 +0200 From: Hasse <webmaster@swedehost.com> To: dick hoogendijk <dick@nagual.st> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Question about portsdb -uU Message-ID: <200308021525.25972.webmaster@swedehost.com> In-Reply-To: <20030802095916.GA19674@lothlorien.nagual.st> References: <200308020029.45849.webmaster@swedehost.com> <20030802095916.GA19674@lothlorien.nagual.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday 02 August 2003 11.59, dick hoogendijk wrote: > On 02 Aug Hasse wrote: > > I have a question about portsdb -uU > > After a ports cvsup, does it replace the command make index in > > /usr/ports ? Or do you recommend to use both ? > > portsdb -uU *DOES* replace the "make index" from /usr/ports. > > However: while is _is_ quicker, it has some disadvantages! > I advice you to use: > # make index > # portsdb -u > The "make index" is more accurate! It "sees" all the ports, while > portsdb -U sometimes misses some. I like to have a 100% score because a > lot of actions (deps i.e.) depend on a 'sound' portsdb. > > > Someone told me portsdb -uU is a lot faster, but it don't seem to be > > that on my computers. > > On my computer it is (was) faster, but I want quality, so who cares. I > can still work on my machine, can't I, while the index is being > generated ;-)) Thx for clearifying this subject for me. I've been using both commands, just to live on the safe side, and will continue doing that. As you wrote, and I fully agree : " I like to have a 100% score because a lot of actions (deps i.e.) depend on a 'sound' portsdb. " -- Best Regards Hasse.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200308021525.25972.webmaster>