Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 07:38:54 -0800 From: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> To: "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@punkt.de> Cc: LuMiWa <lumiwa@dismail.de>, FreeBSD Ports <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: portsnap Message-ID: <CAN6yY1uzn%2BhbNYGRDmLUfWMm9QENPs3NddKJ7x0LFQkYCby1=A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <42752466-048A-4F37-929E-8CDC5189E8E2@punkt.de> References: <20201226124150.7c494410@dismail.de> <6d0d128b-9a75-34f4-830c-d8be05ded9cb@freebsd.org> <20201226140417.04225f3e@dismail.de> <42752466-048A-4F37-929E-8CDC5189E8E2@punkt.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 4:37 AM Patrick M. Hausen <hausen@punkt.de> wrote: > Hi all, > > > Am 26.12.2020 um 20:04 schrieb LuMiWa via freebsd-ports < > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>: > > ...and I will continue to use portmaster. But I don't understand why > > we should no keep portsnap. > > Kudos to Stefan for keeping portmaster relevant and up-to-date. > But I never understood the appeal of portsnap. What's the advantage over > > svnlite co ... > cd /usr/ports; make update > > This mechanism is in the base system, so an extra tool demands some > justification ;-) > > Kind regards, > Patrick > -- > punkt.de GmbH > Patrick M. Hausen > .infrastructure > > Kaiserallee 13a > 76133 Karlsruhe > > Tel. +49 721 9109500 > > https://infrastructure.punkt.de > info@punkt.de > > AG Mannheim 108285 > Gesch=C3=A4ftsf=C3=BChrer: J=C3=BCrgen Egeling, Daniel Lienert, Fabian St= ein > > portsnap(8) predates svnlite by quite a bit, but you have just described why it is not really worth the overhead of maintaining it. As bugzilla describes many ticket closures, Overcome by events". -- Kevin Oberman, Part time kid herder and retired Network Engineer E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN6yY1uzn%2BhbNYGRDmLUfWMm9QENPs3NddKJ7x0LFQkYCby1=A>