From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 10 20:24:12 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79F8B16A41F for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:24:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cperciva@freebsd.org) Received: from pd4mo3so.prod.shaw.ca (shawidc-mo1.cg.shawcable.net [24.71.223.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FA6F43D55 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:24:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cperciva@freebsd.org) Received: from pd5mr8so.prod.shaw.ca (pd5mr8so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.141.184]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IPR00MYIA088E90@l-daemon> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:24:08 -0700 (MST) Received: from pn2ml10so.prod.shaw.ca ([10.0.121.80]) by pd5mr8so.prod.shaw.ca (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IPR00LC3A084R90@pd5mr8so.prod.shaw.ca> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:24:08 -0700 (MST) Received: from [192.168.0.60] ([24.87.209.6]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IPR00HCNA08JJ70@l-daemon> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:24:08 -0700 (MST) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 12:24:07 -0800 From: Colin Percival In-reply-to: To: "Andrew P." Message-id: <4373AC67.4010403@freebsd.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en-us, en X-Enigmail-Version: 0.93.0.0 References: <200511091224.13143.kirk@strauser.com> <200511091044.04253.kstewart@owt.com> <200511091313.50741.kirk@strauser.com> <43725078.6000303@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051001) Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvsup vs. portsnap (was Re: cvsup problem) 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: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 20:24:12 -0000 Andrew P. wrote: > There are a couple more points against portsnap: > - it lags behind by a few hours. This is true (well, 1-2 hours). However, the reason for this is that portsnap builds ports INDEX files, and since portsnap is usually more up-to-date than the INDEX files fetched by "make fetchindex", the lag time is probably less of a problem than one might imagine at first. That said, the build times should be improving somewhat as I move portsnap builds to some new hardware in the near future. > - setting up a mirror is still undocumented I'm working on it; but for most users, a caching HTTP proxy will be far better than an actual portsnap mirror. Colin Percival