From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 30 18:12:37 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32FE11065673 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:12:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from edflecko@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gx0-f182.google.com (mail-gx0-f182.google.com [209.85.161.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2DD18FC13 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:12:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gxk24 with SMTP id 24so912179gxk.13 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:12:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=euLyPmDr8BoxRfCDdXD40tgGhSS/Kz19KuAb43HWBMM=; b=a0fgk5TPI7iOwg8JxXC8f48EhLAjqp9sa1wtiCZbdS4ZHV5T6VEz2eYMo5aHEHmFDM SmfJEATGtBlWDKHQaGL7eLnuNFo4PMu97PdswLzyAuholV7G+EImQeLaPMUTt2GXI4K7 eRNEjbkY6yIY8jF5LZfMqUtH919jYVgrJEmPI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=uACxK+FDWVzmuMtwqL1KGoth2Nf3tMsSNpq77i+NJG4oB3jtdVvOkkF9Bku+tXRP5E heb6bQ2Sh/D/sJ+ORWMIQZFzdBn0HzqtBM2k8wnBPAjfl2z54DoNTUeleLWg2BgAJmlX 07wyECu+rHzfWhMRvhp7vNCbViXEMd7U9OJW0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.101.170.3 with SMTP id x3mr2655023ano.142.1280513556154; Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:12:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.118.98 with HTTP; Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:12:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20100730175404.GA32794@slackbox.erewhon.net> References: <20100730175404.GA32794@slackbox.erewhon.net> Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 11:12:36 -0700 Message-ID: From: Ed Flecko To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: Correct syntax of "supfile" to keep ports upgraded? 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: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:12:37 -0000 Thank you Roland; I didn't know portsnap is part of the base install. :-) >From a book that I have (Absolute FreeBSD - 2nd Edition), it says" PORTSNAP VS. CSUP Use either portsnap(8) or csup(1) to update the Ports Collection, but not both. The two tools are incompatible. csup is most useful if you are tracking -stable or -current, while portsnap is best for production systems where you use binary updates. You can make either portsnap(8) or csup(1) work in either situation, but you must pick one and stick with it!" Does this apply to me, since I'm following the "errata" branch (*default release=cvs tag=RELENG_8_0) and up update, I use the following command: csup -4 /etc/stable-supfile Maybe I should use cvsup (cvsup -g -L 2 /etc/stable-supfile) instead so I can use portsnap??? What do you think? Ed