Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 27 Nov 2012 17:07:15 +0100
From:      Fleuriot Damien <ml@my.gd>
To:        glarkin@FreeBSD.org
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: When Is The Ports Tree Going To Be Updated?
Message-ID:  <CDBBB008-0274-4976-ACD3-6041373E71D3@my.gd>
In-Reply-To: <50B4DBD3.2050901@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <50B2A57A.3050500@tundraware.com> <50B2A8D8.90301@FreeBSD.org> <50B2AA07.8090103@tundraware.com> <201211251856.40381.lumiwa@gmail.com> <50B2BEE1.9030903@tundraware.com> <loom.20121126T120530-186@post.gmane.org> <05eafe033134e0771d54dec2d9388c8f@homey.local> <loom.20121126T161423-178@post.gmane.org> <C1998C36-57DF-4ACE-8AF2-09E1885E7176@my.gd> <loom.20121126T170433-746@post.gmane.org> <loom.20121126T182635-720@post.gmane.org> <50B3BA6E.7060303@tundraware.com> <loom.20121126T201404-815@post.gmane.org> <CAE63ME5YQ-UJ5z9Mu9-PyxgceK4Gd_oBL4_Pm=e+fp_Z=Mf6_A@mail.gmail.com> <50B4DBD3.2050901@FreeBSD.org>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help

On Nov 27, 2012, at 4:27 PM, Greg Larkin <glarkin@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>=20
> On 11/27/12 4:36 AM, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
>> On 26 November 2012 21:15, jb <jb.1234abcd@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Tim Daneliuk <tundra <at> tundraware.com> writes:
>>>=20
>>>> ... One wonders if using svn to keep the ports tree up-to-date
>>>> might not be simpler, and perhaps, more reliable ...
>>>=20
>>> As managed by portsnap: $ du -hs /usr/ports/ 850M    /usr/ports/
>>>=20
>>> As managed by svn (it took much longer to checkout/download it by
>>> comparison): $ du -hs /usr/local/ports/ 1.4G
>>> /usr/local/ports/ $ du -hs /usr/local/ports/.svn/ 702M
>>> /usr/local/ports/.svn/
>>>=20
>>> One thing about svn is that it is a developer's tool, with its
>>> own commands set (that should never be mixed with UNIX commands
>>> w/r to dir/file manipulation), and that should not be expected to
>>> be learned by non-devs.
>>>=20
>>> For that reasons alone the portsnap-managed ports repo is more
>>> generic, flexible to be handled by user and add-on
>>> apps/utilities, looks like more efficient without that svn
>>> overhead resulting from its requirements and characteristics as a
>>> source control system.
>>>=20
>>> But, svn offers to a user a unique view into ports repo, e.g.
>>> history, logs, info, attributes, etc.
>>>=20
>>> jb
>>>=20
>>=20
>> While we're on the binary vs SVN topic, I'd like to point out I'm=20
>> *actually running out of inodes* on a virtualized machine (we use=20
>> these a lot for our dev and preproduction environments) with 5gb
>> of space, when checking out the ports tree.
>>=20
>> Of course 5gb is quite small but then, this was installed a while
>> back.
>>=20
>> The transition to SVN means I'm going to have to reinstall these
>> firewalls. There are a lot of them it's going to be a major pain.
>>=20
>>=20
>> idk, I'm loathe to use portsnap, I liked CSup just fine.
>=20
> Unless you plan to use svn commands other than checkout in your ports
> tree, I would suggest switching to "svn export" or perhaps the
> svn-export script (http://xyne.archlinux.ca/projects/svn-export/) to
> fetch your ports tree.
>=20
> The export command will not create the .svn metadata directory and
> will save on inode usage.  Of course, you could also create a new
> virtual disk for /usr/ports and tune it with more inodes if you'd
> rather use svn checkout.
>=20
> Hope that helps,
> Greg
>=20
> - --=20
> Greg Larkin



Well I definitely don't plan on making changes to local files or =
committing stuff, I'd just like to keep an updated ports tree and switch =
from CVS to SVN.

I guess I'll have a look at svn export, thanks for the tip Greg.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CDBBB008-0274-4976-ACD3-6041373E71D3>