From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 18 05:24:21 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF6B16A4CE for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 05:24:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.vonostingroup.com (ip209-154.digitalrealm.net [216.144.209.154]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2A50E43D1F for ; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 05:24:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from laszlof@vonostingroup.com) Received: (qmail 36804 invoked by uid 0); 18 Mar 2004 13:24:42 -0000 Received: from laszlof@vonostingroup.com by ritamari.vonostingroup.com by uid 89 with qmail-scanner-1.20 Clear:RC:0(68.32.91.145):SA:0(2.6/5.0):. Processed in 5.405472 secs); 18 Mar 2004 13:24:42 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.6 required=5.0 Received: from unknown (HELO vonostingroup.com) (laszlof@68.32.91.145) by ip209-154.digitalrealm.net with SMTP; 18 Mar 2004 13:24:36 -0000 Message-ID: <4059A2FA.7010603@vonostingroup.com> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:24:10 -0500 From: Frank Laszlo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20040301 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oliver Eikemeier References: <40599FD9.2010007@vonostingroup.com> <4059A194.3000908@fillmore-labs.com> In-Reply-To: <4059A194.3000908@fillmore-labs.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fetch resume support X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 13:24:21 -0000 Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > Frank Laszlo wrote: > >> I was thinking about this the other evening when I recieved an email >> from Trevor Johnson about the SIZE now incorporated into the >> distinfo. With this in place, it would be quite easy to add support >> for resumable distfile fetching. I would be more than happy to write >> a patch for bsd.port.mk for this, but I would like to see how the >> community responds to it. What do you all think? > > > Since bsd.port.mk already calls fetch with -Rr, what would you want to > patch? > Btw, how does this relate to SIZE? I didnt notice this was allready there, go figure. As for the SIZE, I figure one could compare the size of what has allready been fetched to what exists for the SIZE variable to determine whether or not to use -r. apparently this has allready been done. A little late I guess. :) ------------------------------ Frank Laszlo VonOstin Group laszlof at vonstingroup dot com