Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 17 Sep 2012 21:14:55 -0600 (MDT)
From:      Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com>
To:        Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com>
Cc:        Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com>, questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: What replaces csup?
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1209172102400.26215@wonkity.com>
In-Reply-To: <20567.50041.903201.979498@jerusalem.litteratus.org>
References:  <D97788AE24B7FFB0C79AA6FB@localhost> <k38bct$ang$1@ger.gmane.org> <780066C6E2FAB67A997876B7@Pauls-MacBook-Pro.local> <20567.50041.903201.979498@jerusalem.litteratus.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 17 Sep 2012, Robert Huff wrote:

>
> Paul Schmehl writes:
>
>>  Does csup use subversion now?  Or do we need to use something
>>  else to fetch source?
>
> 	As I understand it, for the average user c(vs)up and subversion
> serve the same function using different methods (both in terms of
> identifying what files need to be fetched and actually fetching
> them).  At this level of discussion they are mutually exclusive.
> 	I have switched from csup to subversion for ports and docs.
> After modest preparation it was essentially painless.

The difference is that a local svn checkout has all the commit history. 
A comparison recently showed 700-some megabytes more space used by the 
svn checkout.

csup updates just the files that have changed without all the overhead. 
svn export can get a copy of all the current files, but it copies all of 
them every time, not just the changes.

An svnup program was under development, but I don't know the present 
status.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1209172102400.26215>