On 01/22/13 14:00, Oliver Lehmann wrote:
Guido Falsi <m...@madpilot.net> wrote:
If you use small modifications on a ingle system(or just a few) you
could track the ports tree with subversion, which will be happy to
keep and try to merge your local modifcations. You can also diff and
revert your modifications using it, which can be quite handy.
Disvantage is you will sometime need to merge conflicts which could
require you to study subversion more than what you really want.
Ok, subversion came also to my mind but I guess portsnap is faster then
svn is. The thing with svn is, that I would always need to examine the
logs if there where conflicts generated.
I don't want to keep my local changes. I would like to have command
which just gets me a 1:1 copy of the "current" ports tree and deletes
or overwrites my local changes. There is nothing I want to get merged.
Ok, I misunderstood your problem then.
I think your best bet is deleting the old tree and extracting it again
with portsnap, this would not be very fast though.
If you use zfs you could leverage it, using snapshots and clones. You
could snapshot the official tree, clone it, modify the cloned one(munted
in /usr/ports) and when you upgrade destroy the clone and create a new
clone from the updated official tree, which would be clean without local
modifications.
subversion could help too. You could perform a "svn revert -R ."
followed by svn up. This would be faster than "rm -r * && portsnap
extract" (done in /usr/ports, obviously)
--
Guido Falsi <m...@madpilot.net>
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
