Re: [gentoo-user] Re: what is "a normal rsync"?

[tecnic5@silvanoc.com]

Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com>
Enviado por: news <news@ger.gmane.org>
12/03/2008 04:33
Por favor, responda a gentoo-user
 
        Para:   gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
        cc: 
        Asunto: [gentoo-user] Re: what is "a normal rsync"?

On 2008-03-12, Shawn Haggett <podge@podgeweb.com> wrote:
> Grant Edwards wrote:
>>
>> I'm behind a firewall that doesn't allow rsync connections, so
>> I did a emege-webrsync.  It appears to have downloaded and
>> installed a current snapshot and updated the portage cache:

>>    *** Completed websync, please now perform a normal rsync if 
possible.
>>        Update is current as of the of YYYYMMDD: 20080310

>> What is meant by "perform a normal rsync"?

> I assume it would mean the normal "emerge --sync" if you can, which you 
> can't. I would assume it would say this since the rsync would be more up 

> to date then the webrsync snapshot....

OK, but why would one have done a webrsync in the first place
unless doing an "emerge --sync" wasn't possible?

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  Catsup and 
Mustard
                                  at               all over the place! 
It's
                               visi.com            the Human Hamburger!

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list


***

AFAIK emerge-webrsync downloads one single tar.bz2-ed file and then 
expands it to obtain the portage tree, while normal rsync checks for 
differences in every file and then fetches the new ones. My guess is that 
normal rsync is faster when your current copy of the Portage tree is 
almost up-to-date, since just a files will be downloaded, however, if your 
copy is old, you'll make it easier just getting a whole copy of the tree 
(even if it isn't the latest one).

Does the community agree?

Abraham

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list