[20030625] Jesse Meyer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Why bother with NFS when you can use apt-proxy (apt-cache show > apt-proxy). This seems to be the more robust solution, since as soon > as you install nifty_package_1.0 on 2 of the machines, your nfs-update > solution might suffer.
I'm new to debian :) So using this apt-proxy, when installing packages with apt-get on clients fetches the packages from the server to the clients' apt cache ? If it does I guess I should enable "clean" on apt-get on clients to save disk space... > > Also I want to keep updated some off-line (or w/ 56k-modem) boxes > > using the same way & then use apt-zip to upgrade them, fetching > > newer packages off work. Should I transfer the same dir from the > > 'server' on these boxes ? > > I haven't tried it, but apt-move looks like it could be an excellent > solution. Else, there is always the 3 am cronjob to only download > the updates and send an email to you in the morning. I don't want to move the packages on the offline boxes, I want package database, so that I don't need to run apt-get update on that box... > (PS: For some odd reason, mutt tried to include your signature in > the reply. Is your sig deliminator dash dash space return? If it > is, ignore this, its 4:17 am local time, and I could be suffering > from sleep deprivation.) Never happened before... -- Manolis Tzanidakis (mtzanidakis-at-freemail-dot-gr) Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 102798230 GnuPG Key Fingerprint: 5CA5 41D6 09F1 C4B9 C331 65EF 4B3F 6979 EB8C 88F3 Get my public key at: pgp.mit.edu
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
