Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 22:13:02 -0400 From: "David Stanford" <dthomas53@gmail.com> To: "Aren Olvalde Tyr" <aren.tyr@gawab.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap Message-ID: <f2c91f770605131913t7c69b4a5p8e34a3f98ef2a714@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200605132330.08793.aren.tyr@gawab.com> References: <000301c676b3$9f398b90$6603a8c0@zeus> <200605132330.08793.aren.tyr@gawab.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 5/13/06, Aren Olvalde Tyr <aren.tyr@gawab.com> wrote: > > On Saturday 13 May 2006 18:35, Tom Moore wrote: > > Hi guys. > > Which program is best for retrieving and keeping the ports tree up to > date? > > What are some pros and cons of each approach? > > Is one method better than the other? > > Both systems are very efficient and work extremely well, so you won't go > too > far wrong with either. However, I believe Portsnap has the edge and uses > less > bandwidth. > > Keeping your Ports tree up to date with Portsnap is as simple as > > #portsnap fetch && portsnap update Or as of 6.0-RELEASE, just: # portsnap fetch update ;) Assuming, of course, you've already extracted the tree... Aren. -David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f2c91f770605131913t7c69b4a5p8e34a3f98ef2a714>