From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 21 23:17:47 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@FreeBSD.Org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D610716A41F for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 23:17:47 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mail2.fluidhosting.com [204.14.90.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5C4EB43D7E for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2005 23:17:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 4163 invoked by uid 399); 21 Dec 2005 23:05:41 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.1.101?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 21 Dec 2005 23:05:41 -0000 Message-ID: <43A9DFC2.4010209@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:05:38 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051203) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bjorn Nelson References: <200512211001.jBLA1AGD083539@freefall.freebsd.org> <23ADE556-01C7-4E87-AB2E-A70DBCD1D7C0@insidesystems.net> <090F429F-D173-4CBF-84E2-F3952449E1FA@belovedarctos.com> In-Reply-To: <090F429F-D173-4CBF-84E2-F3952449E1FA@belovedarctos.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ports@FreeBSD.Org Subject: Re: internal distfiles mirror X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 23:17:47 -0000 Bjorn Nelson wrote: > All, > > I am mirroring ftp://ftp2.freebsd.org's/pub/FreeBSD/ports/distfiles to > an internal server that allows other servers to mount it via nfs and > install from there. I am running into the problem where it seems that > the ports tree gets updated more frequently then ftp2's distfiles > directory . Yes, that's going to be very consistent. > Is there a more up-to-date distfiles server I should mirror > or would it be better to just do a make fetch-recursive in /usr/ports? The latter. hth, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection