Has the port collection become to large to handle.
killing at multiplay.co.uk
Mon May 15 17:15:14 UTC 2006
Paul Schmehl wrote:
> Steven Hartland wrote:
> I'm trying to figure out if you're really serious here.
> When I do a fresh install, I install ports from the CD I've burned.
> The first thing I do after completing the install is install cvsup.
> Then I cvsup the ports tree *and* src *and* docs. This usually takes
> about 15 or 20 minutes. Then I install portupgrade. Then I run
> portupgrade, which upgrades cvsup. Then I set up a periodic/daily
> task that runs cvsup (cvsup -g -L 2 /etc/cvsupfile). Then I install
> portaudit, so I will know when a security vulnerability shows up in
> any of the installed ports.
Why would I waste cpu time and bandwidth updating when I dont need
to that sounds totally pointless, not to mention it means there you
dont have any check points to go back to if a install gets corrupt
and needs to be rebuilt.
> Then I begin installing whatever ports I need for the purpose of the
> The daily cvsup usually takes a minute or two.
Try stopping the daily cvsup and do them when required say for
an important patch. A few months worth of updates takes a decent
amount of time which would be eliminated if there was a way to
update just the ports people where interested in.
> Where are you getting this "shear volume of files" thing from?
As mentioned try after a few months to get an important update and
see how long it takes.
> *If* you don't install ports during the initial install, *then* cvsup
> will have to download the entire ports collection, which would
> certainly take a while, but that would be your choice, rather than a
> problem with the system. *If* you install ports from the CD (or FTP
> or whatever your preferred install method is), then the initial cvsup
> will take a little while (because there's a lot to update), but after
> that, a daily cvsup will refresh your ports without taking very long
> or consuming very much bandwidth. *And* you'll be able to rebuild
> world any time you want, because your sources will be up to date.
Exactly the problem "cvsup will take a little while (because there's
a lot to update)" a lot to update: 95->99% of which 99% of people
aren't interested in and hence is a huge waist of time and resources.
> This seems like common sense to me. Why would you only cvsup once a
> month and then complain about how long it takes? You *chose* to do it
> that way.
Why would we waste resources locally and on the cvs servers doing
it every day? How many of the ports have you ever used? I'd hesitate
a guess that even a fairly heavy user would still only use around 150
ports so that means your our updates are spending 99% of their time
updating things we will never use.
No one is saying the current solution doesn't work what is being asked
is are their better, cheaper and quicker solutions? I'd have to say
yes there are and as such its worth investigating. It wont stop
anyone being able to download and install a rarely used port XXXX
but it would mean that unless you did want port XXX you wouldn't be
"forced" to download it.
This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it.
In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137
or return the E.mail to postmaster at multiplay.co.uk.
More information about the freebsd-ports