csup vs. cvsup [was: Ports collection issue]

[Karol Kwiatkowski]

[format recovered]

On 27/10/2006 14:41, Andy Greenwood wrote:
> On 10/27/06, Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg <listsub at 401.cx> wrote:
>> I would recommend using csup instead of cvsup.
>> It has fewer dependencies, is very lightweight and works very well
>> if you just want to occasionally checkout ports or src.
>> I believe that csup is also part of the basesystem in newer releases.
>>
> Is it possible to use csup with my existing cvsup files? I skimmed
> the man page and it looks very similar. Is there any advantage to
> using cvsup over csup?

I'm not sure if there are any, but csup is simply a reimplementation
of cvsup in C, as manpage says.

I'm using it as a replacement, here's a snip of my update-src.sh
script (I was previously using cvsup):

% [...]
% CSUP=/usr/bin/csup
% CVSUP=/usr/local/bin/cvsup
%
% CVS_UPDATER=${CSUP}
% [...]
% ${CVS_UPDATER} -L 2 -h ${SERVER} /root/supfiles/standard
% [...]

HTH,

Karol

-- 
Karol Kwiatkowski  <freebsd at orchid dot homeunix dot org>
OpenPGP: http://www.orchid.homeunix.org/carlos/gpg/0x06E09309.asc

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20061027/66e69334/signature.pgp