Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      03 Feb 2006 07:10:47 -0500
From:      Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.ilk.org>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: portsnap, excluding parts of the ports tree
Message-ID:  <441wyklk1k.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
In-Reply-To: <43E1D187.3090007@elitists.org>
References:  <43E1D187.3090007@elitists.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"F. Even - fbsd-questions" <freebsdlists@elitists.org> writes:

> I know I can run "portsnap extract sysutils/portupgrade" ...or
> something to that effect....but that will not "register" say for a
> "portsnap update" after a new "portsnap fetch".  This is what I will
> get for an error if I try that:
> 
> [root@gv:/usr/ports]$ portsnap update
> /usr/ports was not created by portsnap.
> You must run 'portsnap extract' before running 'portsnap update'.
> 
> ...is there any way I can only maintain a small portion of the ports
> tree while still using portsnap (or should I not bother and just use
> cvsup)?  I'd like to keep the parts of the ports collection around
> that I use, but not all of it...as this box has space issues.

Both portsnap and cvsup can refuse specified parts of the ports tree.
In both cases, though, proper behaviour is only guaranteed if you have
a full ports tree.  Generally, you can work around these if you know
what you're doing, but it will be tricky for naive users.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?441wyklk1k.fsf>