Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2005 08:44:31 -0700 From: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> To: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Adding portsnap to the base system Message-ID: <42F62C5F.6000609@freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I've been told by a committer that there hasn't been enough discussion about the merits of adding portsnap to the base system. The basic summary, for anyone who didn't read yesterday's thread, is that portsnap is a secure, easy to use, fast, low-bandwidth, and lightweight way to keep the ports tree up to date. It is currently used by about 2000 systems each week (based on my server logs; and increasing at a rate of about 50% per month). The feedback I've had from users has been universally glowing, aside from the complaints that it really should be in the base system already. Portsnap is not a complete replacement for CVSup -- it only handles ports, and it only handles the tree, not the repo -- but it is very good at doing the job it is designed for. Discuss. Unless I hear any complaints, I'm going to commit the following patch tomorrow: http://www.daemonology.net/tmp/portsnap-base.diff Colin Percival
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42F62C5F.6000609>