From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 24 00:35:41 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B6441065670 for ; Thu, 24 May 2012 00:35:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com (mail-wi0-f172.google.com [209.85.212.172]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD0F38FC0A for ; Thu, 24 May 2012 00:35:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wibhj8 with SMTP id hj8so4266695wib.13 for ; Wed, 23 May 2012 17:35:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yZ4jGXmUFQDPxki0MoAONz4NTOdAA0BzJQVx7DZTj1Q=; b=BbWJ/Ak1yXYjNmJx/q6JdesefnATxY0HJJcHMW1cRSvV80hXe2E3uqXEvbx7c0StX7 q32cs6W6jhJw2UU9mFVXfeQ3cez1EAkA3p8ag+zYMNHzmqmgjVfBUmaXWpDKuNQaDQmi Hw9tfu4zl2Ggx9V9QP14yP0eiupZ0gzBAcKbdzb4EeGN48zY22ZCyvjYb7lY+jxnfeyf FhWh9adzrnAAFX/OHRuxABks0SlC0dg7X/oY0DrD7+4u4mWRkHC5pxIFps5aK5SisUsw JNA5eCDxBm2gHn9TTCuqVwh8+k1Piuz+rVAr+qU50H+1I7/qUmIKmLv9nQClA/oBDTbO j1zQ== Received: by 10.216.197.4 with SMTP id s4mr2335853wen.181.1337819739726; Wed, 23 May 2012 17:35:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (87-194-105-247.bethere.co.uk. [87.194.105.247]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k8sm2101082wia.6.2012.05.23.17.35.36 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 23 May 2012 17:35:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 01:35:34 +0100 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20120524013534.7b5038cf@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <1800315639.3547775.1337736644930.JavaMail.root@md03.insight.synacor.com> References: <4FBC1B06.6060102@dreamchaser.org> <1800315639.3547775.1337736644930.JavaMail.root@md03.insight.synacor.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd8.3) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: portsnap update won't update original /usr/ports 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: Thu, 24 May 2012 00:35:41 -0000 On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:30:44 -0400 (EDT) Thomas Mueller wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gary Aitken > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Sent: Tue, 22 May 2012 19:02:30 -0400 (EDT) > Subject: portsnap update won't update original /usr/ports > > According to the handbook, one can do > portsnap fetch > portsnap update > and the update will work with a previously created ports tree; > I presume this includes one created during system install. It says: "If you are running Portsnap for the first time, extract the snapshot into /usr/ports: # portsnap extract If you already have a populated /usr/ports and you are just updating, run the following command instead..." If you have the tree from the disk then that means you are running portsnap for the first time, the second sentence refers to a /usr/ports populated by a portsnap extract. > ---- My response: ---- > > Now I wonder if it's feasible to switch between "portsnap fetch > update" and csup , or if it's strictly one or the > other. You'll probably get away with it most of the time, but it's not safe to mix them.