From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 26 08:05:51 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E800616A418 for ; Wed, 26 Dec 2007 08:05:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@sequestered.net) Received: from alcatraz.sequestered.net (alcatraz.sequestered.net [64.183.71.234]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7DB313C468 for ; Wed, 26 Dec 2007 08:05:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@sequestered.net) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (Authenticated sender: singularity@sequestered.net) with ESMTP id 2F6E06783B ; Wed, 26 Dec 2007 00:05:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <47720B5F.8090407@sequestered.net> Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 00:05:51 -0800 From: Jay Chandler User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Dan Mahoney, System Admin" References: <20071225234859.F75015@prime.gushi.org> <4771E0A0.60008@sequestered.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Portsnap -- update claims "up to date" but it's not. 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: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 08:05:52 -0000 Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote: > On Tue, 25 Dec 2007, Jay Chandler wrote: > >> Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote: >>> Maybe I'm just doing this completely wrong: >>> >>> prime# portsnap update >>> Ports tree is already up to date. >>> prime# portsnap fetch >>> Looking up portsnap.FreeBSD.org mirrors... 4 mirrors found. >>> Fetching snapshot tag from portsnap3.FreeBSD.org... done. >>> Fetching snapshot metadata... done. >>> Updating from Mon Nov 12 18:16:16 EST 2007 to Tue Dec 25 21:36:54 >>> EST 2007. >>> Fetching 4 metadata patches... done. >>> Applying metadata patches... done. >>> Fetching 4 metadata files... >>> [and so on] >>> >>> Am I using this thing wrong? >>> >>> -Dan >> >> Yup. 'portsnap fetch update' is the command I use-- the reverse >> order that you're using 'em in. > > Shouldn't I just need one of the two? > > -Dan Nope. fetch fetches the latest snapshot; update unpacks it. extract does the ENTIRE snapshot again, but that's generally not needed after the first time. -- Jay Chandler / KB1JWQ Living Legend / Systems Exorcist Today's Excuse: Vendor no longer supports the product