Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 12:30:43 +0200 From: "[LoN]Kamikaze" <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: portscout - new distfile scanner Message-ID: <44324AD3.8070809@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <20060404094549.GA751@picobyte.net> References: <20060403190532.GA966@picobyte.net> <20060404094549.GA751@picobyte.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Shaun Amott wrote: > Thanks for all the feedback everyone. It's been very useful. > > I'm slightly disappointed by all the false positives. The only > explanation I have for portscout finding versions that don't exist is > hosts lieing about files. Edwin's script dealt with this by using a host > blacklist - portscout tries to avoid the problem by sending dummy files > to the master site and looking for "ok" responses. I have a feeling that > portscout is being too aggressive and causing connection failures by > flooding the network. > > There seems to be another bug that has surfaced which affects certain > files with version number components beginnings with "0". I'm looking > into this. Octal interpretation? > Someone noted that portscout found 0.811 as a update for 0.9 -- > unfortunately, when I tried to account for weird versions like this > before, it didn't work out well at all. So, for now, portscout assumes > version numbers count up. Which would be correct according to the porters handbook. So this is an error in the port, because the number should be 0.8.11 or portepoch needs to be increased. > I did another test run last night with improved results. Version string > extraction has improved considerably; there are more results than > before, and from what I can tell, less false positives. The results have > been uploaded. > > Building the database from scratch takes a long time - I haven't timed > it recently, but I think it finishes in around three hours. That is > essentially converting all the information from the ports tree into a > usable, easily-accessible format. > > Re-building after a cvsup/index takes a minute or two. > > The check last night took 2:40:51; the machine is a PIII 750MHz with > 256MB RAM and very fast disks. It usually has a load average of 0 - 1; > Running portscout with 30 parallel processes puts the load average up to > 12.0. Average download bandwidth used was around 780Kbps. > > I will do another run tonight with less processes and see if the phantom > updates disappear. > > -Shaun >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44324AD3.8070809>