Archives
Archives
| From: | Matthias Maier <tamiko@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: why are we still distributing the portage tree via rsync? | ||
| Date: | Tue, 03 Jul 2018 16:33:49 | ||
| Message-Id: | 87va9wl1nq.fsf@gentoo.org | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: why are we still distributing the portage tree via rsync? by Matt Turner |
||
| 1 | On Tue, Jul 3, 2018, at 11:22 CDT, Matt Turner <mattst88@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 | |
| 3 | > I'd be happy to switch if the space requirements were similar. |
| 4 | |
| 5 | $ git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/gentoo-mirror/gentoo |
| 6 | |
| 7 | occupies 662M on my machine (just tested). With full history |
| 8 | (i.e. without --depth=1) I am at 1.1GB. |
| 9 | |
| 10 | Best, |
| 11 | Matthias |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: why are we still distributing the portage tree via rsync? | Matt Turner <mattst88@g.o> |