Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 17:11:16 -0400 From: Robert Simmons <rsimmons0@gmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Wildly different numbers of portsnap updates between i386 and amd64? Message-ID: <CA%2BQLa9CDBSE-OngMaK04Cv0-aisjm3imUtFdN=jDgwi18x=yBQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CADbaceLm5sfjhvk0_XMOBK5jPSZzZGXDBSGitMgQs5946z-6fw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CADbaceLm5sfjhvk0_XMOBK5jPSZzZGXDBSGitMgQs5946z-6fw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The update is a delta from what is already on your system. When you updated the older box, you pulled in lots of changes to get it current. The newer box needed fewer updates to get current. Or something is wrong. You can always delete the contents of /ports and the database in /var/db/portsnap. Then just portsnap fetch && portsnap extract. You will get a fresh ports tree. On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Christian Campbell <dcamp@alumni.ufl.edu> wrote: > Hi. I run 9.1-RELEASE on two boxes: one i386 and the other amd64. I've run > the latter for a bit over a week. When I portsnap update, the 32-bit > machine typically gets several to dozens or hundreds of updates, while the > 64-bit machine typically gets none, or maybe a couple. What might be the > explanation for this behaviour? > > Thank you, > Christian > > _____________________________________________________ > 3425 SW 2nd Ave, #239 cell (352) 514-7411 > Gainesville, FL 32607-2813 > dcamp@alumni.ufl.edu<https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=dcamp@alumni.ufl.edu>; > > On this perfect day / Nothing's standing in my way... -Hoku > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2BQLa9CDBSE-OngMaK04Cv0-aisjm3imUtFdN=jDgwi18x=yBQ>