is csup broken?

[Polytropon]

On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 11:08:24 -0500, Fbsd8 wrote:
> Polytropon wrote:
> > On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:34:54 -0500, Fbsd8 wrote:
> >> Polytropon wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:14:17 -0500, Fbsd8 wrote:
> >>>> Been using same script for years to fetch selected port files.
> >>>> Today I get error message
> >>>> Unknown collection "ports-sysutils"
> >>>>
> >>>> Running 9.1 and this worked in 2012
> >>> Maybe this is related to the removal of CVS-related services
> >>> for obtaining src and ports?
> >>>
> >>> Have you tried checking out via SVN which now is the desired
> >>> default method (even though it's not integrated in the base
> >>> install and the "make" scripting mechanism)?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> This is a catch 22 problem.
> >>
> >> How can I use svn when it's not part of the 9.1 base release?
> >> Have to csup it down first and csup is broken.
> > 
> > You actually don't _have_ to use CSV.
> > 
> > You can install SVN from binary packages via the new "pkg" command
> > (pkgng instead of traditional pkg_* tools).
> > 
> > Or you can obtain a ports tree first with portsnap or from the
> > installation media you've been using, install svn from this,
> > and then continue using svn to obtain updates for ports (and
> > src, if you want).
> > 
> > However, you're right about the fact that svn isn't part of the
> > base installation (yet?) and it doesn't fully integrate with
> > what worked with CVS for many years.
> > 
> > 
> >
> 
> Still behind the 8 ball.
> 
> The new "pkg" is not part of the base in 9.1
> and there is no ftp packages for 9.1 and the
> disc1.iso media I installed from has no packages.
> 
> I'm fubarbed

There is an option, even thogh possibly considered unelegant
in your situation:

Install the ports tree from the installation media and then
install the svn port from that "outdated" ports tree. Afterwards
delete the ports tree and use svn to get the components you
need.



> Now I just had a port I maintain committed yesterday
> and I have no way to test it to verify the port is working.
> 
> And doing a portsnap which may not contain my updated port
> for a few days if ever until all the other problem are addressed.

That's true - SVN (formerly CVS) provided you with "ad hoc"
changes to the ports tree, whereas portsnap provides a snapshot
that might not be enough "up to date".

I'd really like to see a svn command being part of the base
installation, with integration into the comfortable "make update"
mechanism for ports and system sources so it can _really and
actually_ replace csup.



-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...