Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 12:14:57 -0600 From: "@lbutlr" <kremels@kreme.com> To: FreeBSD <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Deprecation of portsnap (was: Proposed ports git transition schedule) Message-ID: <C66A1928-CD4D-4CCD-B1EB-E78C469F72C0@kreme.com> In-Reply-To: <20210401101908.vrdkx4kphfjm2dau@nexus.home.palmen-it.de> References: <CAPyFy2AY5WWxJEyD2FX7ZaedpxM_mS58_2qE_x_DOD3=O0iVwA@mail.gmail.com> <20210326092245.0689a732@raksha.tavi.co.uk> <20210326130417.agarfdiuttp5l3vw@nexus.home.palmen-it.de> <20210326142711.4cf61b0e@raksha.tavi.co.uk> <20210326183003.uegcte2aqi7fawuy@nexus.home.palmen-it.de> <YF4rx/5Wl1X7GihM@elch.exwg.net> <20210401101908.vrdkx4kphfjm2dau@nexus.home.palmen-it.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01 Apr 2021, at 04:19, Felix Palmen <felix@palmen-it.de> wrote: > * Christoph Moench-Tegeder <cmt@burggraben.net> [20210326 19:45]: >> ## Felix Palmen (felix@palmen-it.de): >>> I'd assume (someone may correct me) that portsnap will still be >>> supported, >> = https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2020-August/119098.html > Is this finally decided, and is there a timeline? That post I read as the official decision that port snap was going to = die. But WITHOUT_PORTSANP added to the default base would be the = single, I'd think. Most of the ground work has already been done. > portsnap is still built by default on releng/13.0. We'll see if it makes it to RELEASE or not. gitup is working well right now, but it looks more fiddly and I wish the = 'fake JSON' configuration file was actual valid JSON, OTOH, it seems o = run a lot faster than portsnap. --=20 I WILL NOT TRADE PANTS WITH OTHERS Bart chalkboard Ep. 7F05
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C66A1928-CD4D-4CCD-B1EB-E78C469F72C0>