svn and/or portsnap

Thomas Mueller mueller23 at
Tue Sep 11 08:15:33 UTC 2012

On Sun, 9 Sep 2012 10:37:03 +0000 (UTC), Helmut Schneider wrote:
> Hi,

> I'm running a custom kernel so I (guess I) need svn in future to fetch
> sources instead of cvsup. Should I still use portsnap then for ports or
> also fetch them via svn?

Polytropon responded:

> Ports and system sources are managed independently. You can
> use whatever tool you want. Note that portsnap _might_ not
> deliver the most current ports tree for a given point in
> time. For "short time deltas", CVS has often proven to be
> the better tool, but of course portsnap has significant
> advantages (e. g. faster for longer pauses between ports
> tree updates, better integration with "make update" target).
> Depending on your updating habits, choose the tool that
> works best for you.

One question comes up that I didn't think of immediately.

How do you use svn on a fresh install of FreeBSD, no ports yet?

svn/subversion is not part of the base system.

How do you get the ports tree or svn in that case if not using portsnap?


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list