svn and/or portsnap

[Helmut Schneider]

Polytropon wrote:

> 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?
> 
> Ports and system sources are managed independently. You can
> use whatever tool you want.

The question should read: If I need to install svn anyway, is there an
advantage of portsnap over svn to fetch ports.

> 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.

Currently I'm updating ports and src twice a day so I will keep using
svn for both.

Thanks.