From nobody@FreeBSD.org  Thu Apr 10 16:33:45 2014
Return-Path: <nobody@FreeBSD.org>
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 582AA592
	for <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:33:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from cgiserv.freebsd.org (cgiserv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:4])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45103175C
	for <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:33:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from cgiserv.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.6])
	by cgiserv.freebsd.org (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s3AGXj3n066784
	for <freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:33:45 GMT
	(envelope-from nobody@cgiserv.freebsd.org)
Received: (from nobody@localhost)
	by cgiserv.freebsd.org (8.14.8/8.14.8/Submit) id s3AGXjLj066765;
	Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:33:45 GMT
	(envelope-from nobody)
Message-Id: <201404101633.s3AGXjLj066765@cgiserv.freebsd.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:33:45 GMT
From: David Noel <david.i.noel@gmail.com>
To: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Retiring portsnap
X-Send-Pr-Version: www-3.1
X-GNATS-Notify:

>Number:         188433
>Category:       kern
>Synopsis:       Retiring portsnap
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       low
>Responsible:    freebsd-bugs
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          change-request
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Thu Apr 10 16:40:00 UTC 2014
>Closed-Date:    Sun Apr 13 23:39:44 UTC 2014
>Last-Modified:  Sun Apr 13 23:39:44 UTC 2014
>Originator:     David Noel
>Release:        
>Organization:
>Environment:
>Description:
With the inclusion of svnlite in 10 the question comes up of whether we really need the portsnap system or whether it could be safely retired.

The reason I see for it to be retired is that subversion allows us to easily and securely check out the ports tree. Its a one-line command: `svn co https://...`. Keeping it up-to-date it is another one-liner: `cd /usr/ports; svn update`. With the inclusion of svnlite in base, the portsnap code and servers acting as mirrors become redundant and seem like a waste of resources.
>How-To-Repeat:

>Fix:
Remove portsnap from base. Retire the portsnap servers or use them for something else.

>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:

From: Jonathan McKeown <jonathan@scatterlings.org>
To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, david.i.noel@gmail.com
Cc:  
Subject: Re: kern/188433: Retiring portsnap
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:34:34 +0200

 It's all very well having svnlite in 10, but 8 and 9 are still
 supported, albeit as legacy options. People running 8 or 9 will still
 need the portsnap servers.
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed 
State-Changed-By: linimon 
State-Changed-When: Sun Apr 13 23:37:33 UTC 2014 
State-Changed-Why:  
portsnap is still needed for pre-10.0 systems. 


Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-bugs 
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon 
Responsible-Changed-When: Sun Apr 13 23:37:33 UTC 2014 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=188433 
>Unformatted:
