On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 23:04:32 -0700, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 02:11:44AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
>> Here's an idea I just had about apt-proxy/apt-cacher NG. Maybe this
>> could be interesting, maybe it's just crap. Your call.
> My position on special-purpose proxy caches for APT is that
> general-purpose proxy caches (like squid) seem to work fine for me.
> What advantages do they have for others?
Optimization? With a special purpose proxies I can control
how the cache gets updated. For example, I want to keep two versions
of packages I use around -- the current, and the previous one, no
matter how old. Hard to do with Squid, which does not know these two
files ar4e different versi9ons of the same package.
Also, I could work with code that understood apt methods, but
did not understand http proxies (this is not a strong argument, I
know).
manoj
--
I always had a repulsive need to be something more than human. David Bowie
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
