Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

That wouldn't be good enough. -- Larry Wall in <199710131621.JAA14907@wall.org>


devel / comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc / Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?

SubjectAuthor
* 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?Winston
+- Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?Alastair Hogge
+- Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?Alastair Hogge
`- Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?Alastair Hogge

1
14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?

<ydfs0tjpuw.fsf@UBEblock.psr.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=454&group=comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc#454

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: wbe...@UBEBLOCK.psr.com.invalid (Winston)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 19:54:47 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <ydfs0tjpuw.fsf@UBEblock.psr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7a0d75a7d7500ebbadea021744c94210";
logging-data="3151664"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19E2UQuaSNrNYxTgLwk0g2+"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:lDcjIEsBNddrP9vCFpb+h5SXgeo=
sha1:YjGE5qYdgHnJoDJ0ELDSfg4pbHg=
Mail-Copies-To: never
 by: Winston - Sun, 26 Nov 2023 00:54 UTC

Back in FreeBSD 11, there was a partially populated /usr/ports
hierarchy as created by portsnap. The idea (IIRC) was that one could
descend to the top of whichever application you wanted in the file
hierarchy, and then running make would pull in all the program's files
and build it.

FreeBSD 14 uses git, not portsnap. I haven't had occasion to use git
yet, so I'm not familiar with how that particular tool works in detail.

Is the portsnap hierarchy in /usr/ports still useful, or does git just
build the directory tree it needs when you clone/checkout a program's
source?

I'm only asking because if that 930MB isn't useful any more, I can
delete most of /usr/ports/*, freeing up the space. (I'll keep
/usr/ports/ itself.)

TIA,
-WBE

Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?

<ujuhei$21g9t$1@dont-email.me>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=457&group=comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc#457

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: agh...@riseup.net (Alastair Hogge)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 04:26:58 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <ujuhei$21g9t$1@dont-email.me>
References: <ydfs0tjpuw.fsf@UBEblock.psr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 04:26:58 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ef0297d22ad34586c7a223efcce5fab1";
logging-data="2146621"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/g5yhd3ur/oSyxXWJ1ENdPrQZwGvWuxxk="
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
git.gnome.org/pan2)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:JhQ5DWpi9JM2HuV8FpbfvcEuuPA=
 by: Alastair Hogge - Sun, 26 Nov 2023 04:26 UTC

On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 19:54:47 -0500, Winston wrote:

> Back in FreeBSD 11, there was a partially populated /usr/ports hierarchy
> as created by portsnap. The idea (IIRC) was that one could descend to
> the top of whichever application you wanted in the file hierarchy, and
> then running make would pull in all the program's files and build it.

Ahh portsnap was a great tool, was killer for low resource systems and
crappy DSL notinnernet.
> FreeBSD 14 uses git, not portsnap. I haven't had occasion to use git
> yet, so I'm not familiar with how that particular tool works in detail.
>
> Is the portsnap hierarchy in /usr/ports still useful, or does git just
> build the directory tree it needs when you clone/checkout a program's
> source?

I doubt git(1) has any context of the state that portsnap stores. You can
nuke it away, and start clean for use with git, or however you configure
that name space.

> I'm only asking because if that 930MB isn't useful any more, I can
> delete most of /usr/ports/*, freeing up the space. (I'll keep
> /usr/ports/

/usr/ports is just a read-only nullfs mount of an NFS mounted fs, which
stores the git checkout of Ports, on my hosts

--
To health and anarchy

Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?

<ujuhgj$35clk$1@dont-email.me>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=458&group=comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc#458

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: agh...@riseup.net (Alastair Hogge)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 04:28:03 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <ujuhgj$35clk$1@dont-email.me>
References: <ydfs0tjpuw.fsf@UBEblock.psr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 04:28:03 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ef0297d22ad34586c7a223efcce5fab1";
logging-data="3322548"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/7+jBESvZeOAtY2QItKzebbpy4Lp+/EgU="
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
git.gnome.org/pan2)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ech+OtXCNHX5itcXrtfazvV6n/k=
 by: Alastair Hogge - Sun, 26 Nov 2023 04:28 UTC

On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 19:54:47 -0500, Winston wrote:

> Back in FreeBSD 11, there was a partially populated /usr/ports hierarchy
> as created by portsnap. The idea (IIRC) was that one could descend to
> the top of whichever application you wanted in the file hierarchy, and
> then running make would pull in all the program's files and build it.

Ahh portsnap was a great tool, was killer for low resource systems and
crappy DSL notinnernet.
> FreeBSD 14 uses git, not portsnap. I haven't had occasion to use git
> yet, so I'm not familiar with how that particular tool works in detail.
>
> Is the portsnap hierarchy in /usr/ports still useful, or does git just
> build the directory tree it needs when you clone/checkout a program's
> source?

I doubt git(1) has any context of the state that portsnap stores. You can
nuke it away, and start clean for use with git, or however you configure
that name space.

> I'm only asking because if that 930MB isn't useful any more, I can
> delete most of /usr/ports/*, freeing up the space. (I'll keep
> /usr/ports/

/usr/ports is just a read-only nullfs mount of an NFS mounted fs, which
stores the git checkout of Ports, on my hosts

--
To health and anarchy

Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?

<ujuhfg$21g9v$1@dont-email.me>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=459&group=comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc#459

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: agh...@riseup.net (Alastair Hogge)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 04:27:29 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <ujuhfg$21g9v$1@dont-email.me>
References: <ydfs0tjpuw.fsf@UBEblock.psr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 04:27:29 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ef0297d22ad34586c7a223efcce5fab1";
logging-data="2146623"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19yyIKEG8Nt2Z0yatCCkK3L9ObrCaRM5vo="
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
git.gnome.org/pan2)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Lx11kvRt26NbcX9/uBCQC8e9ICM=
 by: Alastair Hogge - Sun, 26 Nov 2023 04:27 UTC

On Sat, 25 Nov 2023 19:54:47 -0500, Winston wrote:

> Back in FreeBSD 11, there was a partially populated /usr/ports hierarchy
> as created by portsnap. The idea (IIRC) was that one could descend to
> the top of whichever application you wanted in the file hierarchy, and
> then running make would pull in all the program's files and build it.

Ahh portsnap was a great tool, was killer for low resource systems and
crappy DSL notinnernet.
> FreeBSD 14 uses git, not portsnap. I haven't had occasion to use git
> yet, so I'm not familiar with how that particular tool works in detail.
>
> Is the portsnap hierarchy in /usr/ports still useful, or does git just
> build the directory tree it needs when you clone/checkout a program's
> source?

I doubt git(1) has any context of the state that portsnap stores. You can
nuke it away, and start clean for use with git, or however you configure
that name space.

> I'm only asking because if that 930MB isn't useful any more, I can
> delete most of /usr/ports/*, freeing up the space. (I'll keep
> /usr/ports/

/usr/ports is just a read-only nullfs mount of an NFS mounted fs, which
stores the git checkout of Ports, on my hosts

--
To health and anarchy


devel / comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc / Re: 14.0: Is the portsnap /usr/ports hierarchy still useful?

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.81
clearnet tor