/usr/portsnap vs. /var/db/portsnap

[Nik Clayton]

Colin Percival wrote:
> But for formality: Does anyone have an objection to having the base system
> enlarged by about 40kB by adding a program for updating the ports tree which
> is faster, uses less bandwidth, is more secure, and is easier to use than cvsup,
> while also having the side benefit of distributing pre-built INDEX files?

Since you ask, only to the name.  Running "ports<TAB>" on my system shows:

    ports_glob
    portsclean
    portsdb

"port<TAB>" shows those plus:

    portaudit
    portcvsweb
    portinstall
    portmap                                                       :-)
    portupgrade
    portversion

Working on the assumption that applications that affect the whole ports 
tree start "ports" and applications that affect single ports start 
"port", "portsnap" left me wondering whether this "snaps" a single port 
somehow, or "naps" (whatever that would be) the whole ports tree.

It may be too late in the day, but I'd far prefer this to be pulled in 
with a more descriptive name:

    portssync
    portsupdate
    portsfresh or portsfreshen

perhaps?

N