Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:10:48 +0000 (UTC) From: jb <jb.1234abcd@gmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portsnap Message-ID: <loom.20121119T170555-865@post.gmane.org> References: <loom.20121119T160541-423@post.gmane.org> <20121119155141.46107723@gumby.homeunix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
RW <rwmaillists <at> googlemail.com> writes: > ... > > ... > > So, why did it do so much work (ca. 5 min, 24085 patches), even > > claiming to have applied patches, before telling me the env was not > > properly set up ? jb > > You gave portsnap two commands - one succeeded and the other failed. > > "fetch" downloads and applies patches to the compressed > snapshot. "update" uses the compressed snapshot to update a > pre-existing ports tree created by an "extract" > ... OK. But this looks like a flaky entry validation - it should be rejected up front as invalid entry, even if it applied to the second part - "update". Because the effect of processing the entire entry "fetch" plus "update" is lost anyway. jb
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?loom.20121119T170555-865>