Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 21:55:10 -0400 From: "Andre Goree" <andre@drenet.info> To: "Damien Fleuriot" <ml@my.gd> Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Proper way to update ports with svn Message-ID: <op.wusfl81tqdqf40@sideswipe.accesso.office> In-Reply-To: <CAE63ME5cqf_AOUFrZ=WyUDf1OR92HCxQL3iNJXCAOUKhMW26Xw@mail.gmail.com> References: <515607C1.2010701@drenet.info> <CAE63ME5cqf_AOUFrZ=WyUDf1OR92HCxQL3iNJXCAOUKhMW26Xw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:52:41 -0400, Damien Fleuriot <ml@my.gd> wrote: > On 29 March 2013 22:29, Andre Goree <andre@drenet.info> wrote: > >> I seem to have to run 'make index' in /usr/ports after I've run 'svn up >> >> >> /usr/ports' in order to see which ports need to be updated using >> >> 'portversion'. This doesn't seem correct...and if so portsnap would >> >> seem like a much better tool. Perhaps I should be running 'make >> >> fetchindex' instead? I'm sure I've read about the correct way to do so, >> >> but it doesn't appear to be here: >> >> https://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsSubversionPrimer >> >> >> >> Thanks in advance for any advice. > > 'make index' looks good to me, it's the right way to do things imo. > > What bothers you, following 'make index', pkg version output seems dodgy > ? > > Mainly, just the amount of time it takes to run "make index", lol. And the fact that I never had to do so with portsnap. I'm thinking that perhaps portsnap runs something similar to 'make fetchindex' within the whole 'portsnap fetch update' process...? -- Andre Goree andre@drenet.info
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.wusfl81tqdqf40>