| 1 |
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 19:12, de Almeida, Valmor F. |
| 2 |
<dealmeidav@××××.gov> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Hello, |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> After using emerge-webrsync I got |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
>> Updating Portage cache: 100% |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> *** Completed websync, please now perform a normal rsync if possible. |
| 12 |
> Update is current as of the of YYYYMMDD: 20090219 |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I am not sure what the message means "perform a normal rsync if |
| 15 |
> possible." I used emerge-webrsync because emerge --sync does not work. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The message couldn't be more clear. |
| 18 |
The webrsync is not a real sync, so you're not with the latest portage |
| 19 |
tree, you have the latest portage daily snapshot, if you do a normal |
| 20 |
sync, then you'll have the latest. To clarify, it even prints the date |
| 21 |
of this snapshot. Even if you had any doubt, the "if possible" message |
| 22 |
should make enough clear. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> Do I still have to do anything else to update the portage tree? Also, I |
| 25 |
> did not get the typical message warning about a new portage version |
| 26 |
> (after emerge-webrsync finished) but I did emerge --oneshot portage |
| 27 |
> anyway and got a new portage. Is this supposed to behave this way? |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
As I said above, if you can't rsync directly, there's no way you can |
| 31 |
get a newer version than you already have... So, you're OK with the |
| 32 |
latest portage tree you can get. Now, about the portage versions:. |
| 33 |
what are the old and new versions? Maybe it was just a revision, not a |
| 34 |
new version, anyway, that's just a guess. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Daniel da Veiga |
Archives