From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 6 10:59:33 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F3F71065674 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 10:59:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from ey-out-2122.google.com (ey-out-2122.google.com [74.125.78.26]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93EE48FC08 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 10:59:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ey-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 22so75714eye.3 for ; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 03:59:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=B+3YWBK3vQl2TQh5Sq0WO/d8776kpbgr7Di11FcnzGQ=; b=wJ6VZ5qV8RPeDIBv+8fQ8q68ksjMxmD9Zs5waqEjydDclOfU7RtFGpGwgMBdIMO9hI QjXi54Wuswb+1/Ov3OvjEi63fpjKmUe9J8RfPqF1nqYZ0z6bWYbh7YiMCQmncaxWO0I5 GhsKrwP2NrJw+5CxtLpTiJgZjW1lRoAir2ppA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=TfHKNgjw/9CkQ/4PSPRM/5GC2h7E6+NDlIer4rOmZXNM6F0wQozESJd1vYT9jewwn5 S2zCxAm8dEQ6rPYcP0Wj1sTkDd/aGBrC4dWVJPlEUgVSqYB5+JFdSOC8JOZiozND2cPI dVOifnql9KhRuynVtmeqDQ7zsJRWp0RCBGfNE= Received: by 10.213.27.145 with SMTP id i17mr196465ebc.35.1275821971542; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 03:59:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (bb-87-81-140-128.ukonline.co.uk [87.81.140.128]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 13sm1895237ewy.1.2010.06.06.03.59.30 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 06 Jun 2010 03:59:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 11:59:28 +0100 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20100606115928.1613a155@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <4C08B16A.4040406@a1poweruser.com> References: <4C08B16A.4040406@a1poweruser.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.20.1; i386-portbld-freebsd8.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: portsnap refuse X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 10:59:33 -0000 On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 15:55:22 +0800 Fbsd1 wrote: > The postsnap says adding refuse statements to select the parts of the > port tree you have use for will shorten the download process and > conserve disk space on your host. That only the port categories not > REFUSED will be selected and compressed for download. > > Well for a test I ran portsnap with out any portsnap.conf file. The > download process took 16 minuets. The I mv portsnap.conf.sample to > portsnap.conf and added REFUSE for all the categories except > sysutils. > > Reran the portsnap and still it took 16 minuets. I'm not sure what you are saying here, if you ran portsnap twice in succession then the second run shouldn't need any downloads. If you deleted portsnap's data in between then that's what I'd expect. portsnap can request updates to ports or files, but the initial download is a single large file which it can't customize.