Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 26 Nov 2012 15:57:57 +0000
From:      Arthur Chance <>
Subject:   Re: When Is The Ports Tree Going To Be Updated?
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <k900u9$62c$> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On 11/26/12 15:38, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 26/11/2012 15:13, Michael Powell wrote:
>> As a result of the security incident I switched away from csup and am now
>> using portsnap for ports, and svn for source. The only disconcerting item I
>> noticed is the 500-some MB .svn directory now under /usr/src/.
> SVN keeps a 2nd pristine copy of everything you check out in that .svn
> directory.  It's necessary when you use it for development work, but
> otherwise, as you say, a waste of space.
>> Can using freebsd-update for source update(s) eliminate the need for this
>> 500MB waste of space? Or is there some switch for svn which could accomplish
>> same?
> freebsd-update will have some overhead -- it downloads changesets to
> somewhere under /var before expanding them onto the system.  I haven't
> measured how much this amounts to compared to SVN, but I'd assume if you
> limit yourself to updating just the system sources with freebsd-update
> then it should use up less space than using SVN.  Normally
> freebsd-update would have updates to compiled programs as well, which
> could move the goalposts significantly.

I use freebsd-update just to fetch src rather than do binary updates and 
I have:

fileserver# du -sh /var/db/freebsd-update/
460k	/var/db/freebsd-update/

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>