From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Laero-0003DU-2K for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2009 23:33:12 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F17F3E0139; Fri, 20 Feb 2009 23:33:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.232]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C16F9E0139 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2009 23:33:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id g9so1011778rvb.2 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2009 15:33:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1hhPhJq8SmplP+AQtvq0msGC+9s4x9DYmm4RdK9DztM=; b=IG10tZwAxBAeaMpY48OvP9MHS2BoAJAVkpWlsgM2pBeM0zQcFJPa55EkFyilSFLBEL 8MpLNAA51U0ere1zl1D/MSGOcSAXkVbBK0qAVRPycJDKgythXkicJQd+AYIjMSuqZ7TL MAwG+JtF91aU3jKBNkraP61EtKQnSy/dcaLeo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=SJxDjFZ3BR6Q3VGRlw0yDkcqsFGOlF7ThxvmbjGukgDOCyotlFXv5JIQswBWlbcbVm wt+ocWb3RrPYNYpYhGdTgmp9lLS3B1gYpvXUd+vXkiBl4CM6s9h3ysE2eZmj1ipRiiWF fbu/qUqmYFDDeoWL3sGrPUpYdu5V8JV/fkKys= Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.141.114.19 with SMTP id r19mr656827rvm.24.1235172790333; Fri, 20 Feb 2009 15:33:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:33:10 -0300 Message-ID: <342e1090902201533u37d6ec11r66e4d4746aa2eb32@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] emerge-webrsync From: Daniel da Veiga To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: c9b14dba-5a23-4e42-b8a0-9af5a62227ca X-Archives-Hash: bfd294055beae0d2a09db19994bc4fd6 On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 19:12, de Almeida, Valmor F. wrote: > > Hello, > > After using emerge-webrsync I got > > >> Updating Portage cache: 100% > > *** Completed websync, please now perform a normal rsync if possible. > Update is current as of the of YYYYMMDD: 20090219 > > I am not sure what the message means "perform a normal rsync if > possible." I used emerge-webrsync because emerge --sync does not work. The message couldn't be more clear. The webrsync is not a real sync, so you're not with the latest portage tree, you have the latest portage daily snapshot, if you do a normal sync, then you'll have the latest. To clarify, it even prints the date of this snapshot. Even if you had any doubt, the "if possible" message should make enough clear. > Do I still have to do anything else to update the portage tree? Also, I > did not get the typical message warning about a new portage version > (after emerge-webrsync finished) but I did emerge --oneshot portage > anyway and got a new portage. Is this supposed to behave this way? > As I said above, if you can't rsync directly, there's no way you can get a newer version than you already have... So, you're OK with the latest portage tree you can get. Now, about the portage versions:. what are the old and new versions? Maybe it was just a revision, not a new version, anyway, that's just a guess. -- Daniel da Veiga