Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 15:48:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Henri Reinikainen <henrixd@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports tree Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1205261546360.70207@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <CADfhKMJvDzc_V_nhTBrOT%2BQRVCPRyGAffD7n52G5oq2oUc3ZgA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CADfhKMJvDzc_V_nhTBrOT%2BQRVCPRyGAffD7n52G5oq2oUc3ZgA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Would it be stupid idea to have publicly available, mountable (nfs) > partition, with full port tree(s)? I think it would be good for > systems with low storage space. I know hd space is cheap, but I run > over and over to this problem. read only or read write? public read write isn't smart. > I don't know how easily it could be done, but some kind of session > based temporary write permissions would be good too. To be able to > make && make install directly from mounted partition. man mount_unionfs > I don't think very many people would need to have local personal copy > of ports tree then. > > So, is this just stupid? no.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1205261546360.70207>