Re: Gotta start somewhere ... how many of us are really out there?

Colin Percival wrote:
There are still a lot of people (particularly on pre-6.0 systems) who
are using CVSup rather than portsnap for updating their ports trees.

Also, I would guess that some people who run multiple FreeBSD systems,
use some sort of local propagation of either the entire ports tree, or
locally compiled packages.

I work as a sysadmin at the students computer lab at the mathematics
department at the Norwegian university of science and technology, and we
take this approach. Not that the maths department is a large one, but we
have fifty-some workstations and a couple of servers running FreeBSD.
Only one or two of which would show up in the portsnap stats.



Svein Halvor

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Gotta start somewhere ... how many of us are really out there?
    ... are using CVSup rather than portsnap for updating their ports trees. ... use some sort of local propagation of either the entire ports tree, ... Not that the maths department is a large one, ... Only one or two of which would show up in the portsnap stats. ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: Gotta start somewhere ... how many of us are really out there?
    ... are using CVSup rather than portsnap for updating their ports trees. ... Even when I upgrade to 6 I think it unlikely I'll be switching to portsnap for 2 main reasons: ... If you want to count by port tree download, ignoring cvsup, would, I think be a mistake. ... Counting portsnap and cvsup accesses is non-intrusive - i.e. nothing sent from local host - will count systems from any version of FreeBSD, but will never count everything because sites with multiple hosts may easily have local propagation mechanisms. ...
    (freebsd-questions)