matthew at FreeBSD.org
Sat May 26 08:44:31 UTC 2012
On 26/05/2012 07:57, Henri Reinikainen wrote:
> Would it be stupid idea to have publicly available, mountable (nfs)
> partition, with full port tree(s)? I think it would be good for
> systems with low storage space. I know hd space is cheap, but I run
> over and over to this problem.
> I don't know how easily it could be done, but some kind of session
> based temporary write permissions would be good too. To be able to
> make && make install directly from mounted partition.
> I don't think very many people would need to have local personal copy
> of ports tree then.
> So, is this just stupid?
Not stupid, but certainly impracticable. Remote mounting filesystems
over the internet is not going to be anything like scalable, and the
bandwidth requirements would be horrid. As an end-user, performance
would suck -- inescapably, as you'ld be hit hard by latency. Basically,
if you could afford the sort of network connectivity that would make
such a setup feasible, then you could easily afford sufficient local
storage that you wouldn't want to use a remote mount.
Also, forget the idea of *writing* to any such share disk space. The
security problems with that just don't bear thinking about.
NFS mounting /usr/ports within a local network -- now, that's a
completely different kettle of fish. You do need to tweak WRKDIRPREFIX
if you're going to have several systems building from the same tree
simultaneously, and it's probably going to be more effective for you to
use one machine as a central package build server and just install from
packages on your limited systems.
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 267 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20120526/be4a9eea/signature-0001.pgp
More information about the freebsd-questions