From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 29 17:52:53 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6BD3106566B for ; Fri, 29 May 2009 17:52:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72D888FC14 for ; Fri, 29 May 2009 17:52:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n4THqqXJ042895; Fri, 29 May 2009 11:52:52 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id n4THqqkj042892; Fri, 29 May 2009 11:52:52 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 11:52:52 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block To: Barry McCormick In-Reply-To: <1243616981.26778.6.camel@bmac-desktop> Message-ID: References: <1243616981.26778.6.camel@bmac-desktop> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 29 May 2009 11:52:52 -0600 (MDT) Cc: Michael Goodell , questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: difference between cvsup and portsnap 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, 29 May 2009 17:52:54 -0000 On Fri, 29 May 2009, Barry McCormick wrote: > Here at my work we use FreeBSD in production. We have the following > debate and wish to know better the differences between cvsup(csup) and > portsnap. One of my co-workers think that portsnap should NOT be used > and only gets the latest and greatest port collection, no matter what > version of FreeBSD is on the server. For example, if you are still > running a 5.4 stable box in production and use any of the portsnap, > portupgrade, etc utilities, you would pull the current version ports and > NOT from teh directory of the 5.4 ports. I.E, risk breaking the > production box. So you should not use portsnap ever except for dev > boxes. The idea that there's a "5.4 ports" directory is mistaken. The ports tree isn't branched; note the lack of a "tag=" entry in the example ports-supfile. csup will let you retrieve from a certain date, but that's not normal usage for the ports tree. So check your ports-supfile. It's probably already retrieving the latest version of ports, just like portsnap. -Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota USA