Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:38:00 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@people.tecnik93.com> Cc: "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Makeing fetchindex really mirror INDEX Message-ID: <1105436280.41e39e7846ca5@netchild.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <20050110191004.73fe13ab@it.buh.cameradicommercio.ro> References: <20050109143903.GC1187@zaphod.nitro.dk> <20050109174945.7f0353e4@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20050109170219.GF1187@zaphod.nitro.dk> <20050109185948.4470a02d@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20050110191004.73fe13ab@it.buh.cameradicommercio.ro>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Zitat von Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@people.tecnik93.com>: > I would be extremely happy if we could have the INDEX-* file and all > associated things be able to use some other dir that PORTSDIR. This way > I could export /usr/ports over NFS and be able to build the INDEX > locally on each client. Is this already possible and I am missing it ? To generate the index you use the index target. We don't touch it with our patches. The fetchindex target fetches the already generated index. To have a consistent ports tree you should use the fetchindex target together with the update target, so I don't see where it would make sense to support a read-only ports tree in the fetchindex target. Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net/ Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org/ netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1105436280.41e39e7846ca5>