From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 23 11:18:03 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org 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 1FD7E16A400 for ; Wed, 23 May 2007 11:18:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmc20@xxiii.com) Received: from imf06aec.mail.bellsouth.net (imf06aec.mail.bellsouth.net [205.152.59.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE71913C44B for ; Wed, 23 May 2007 11:18:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wmc20@xxiii.com) Received: from ibm61aec.bellsouth.net ([68.209.177.221]) by imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20070523110310.FTOK5842.imf18aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm61aec.bellsouth.net> for ; Wed, 23 May 2007 07:03:10 -0400 Received: from wcox.bellsouth.net ([68.209.177.221]) by ibm61aec.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20070523110308.FPJP25479.ibm61aec.bellsouth.net@wcox.bellsouth.net> for ; Wed, 23 May 2007 07:03:08 -0400 Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.2.20070523065540.01db1048@mailsvr.xxiii.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.3.4 Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 07:03:18 -0400 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org From: r17fbsd@xxiii.com In-Reply-To: <4653BA6D.3010009@freebsd.org> References: <6.2.3.4.2.20070522214559.01e29df8@mail.bellsouth.net> <4653BA6D.3010009@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: what's up with portsnap? 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: Wed, 23 May 2007 11:18:03 -0000 At 11:52 PM 5/22/2007, you wrote: >r17fbsd@xxiii.com wrote: > > # portsnap fetch > > Latest snapshot on server is older than what we already have! > >That's really strange. And it doesn't happen for me. >Is it possible that you have a misbehaving proxy which is caching >a month-old snapshot? Colin Percival Oh, crap. The god of portsnap and things FBSD has spoken and said I'm a dipshit. And of course he's right ;) Yeah, it goes through squid.... cause IIRC you suggested it. It speeds up multi-machine updates a bunch. But when they all started doing the same thing, I figured it was something on the servers. I've been snapping for over a year, and it's always worked great through squid. Don't know what changed, but I gave squid a re-init, and portsnap is fetching 6200 patches. I should probably just blow out ports and start from scratch at this point. Thanks, Colin! -RW