I think we have a _bad_ problem here.
apt-cacher just broke for me on a pure debian configuration.
The reason is that the Etch security updates have just gone into
etch-main. However the etch-main packages do _not_ match those from
security (bit puzzled by that - we now have two identically name
On Wed, 2006 Apr 05 09:00:04 +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
>
> So, finally, I decided to take the bitter pill and rewrite it in C++. I
> think the implementation is done to ~60 percent now, including partial
> component tests. From the current POV I think this will be a
> "double-threaded daemon", no
#include
* Daniel Richard G. [Tue, Apr 04 2006, 05:51:52PM]:
> > The problem is, the migration cannot be completely painless. Because
> > without tracking the origin of the packages apt-cacher will keep
> > delievering the wrong files, so it must to "learn" which mirrors or
> > download locations
On Tue, 2006 Apr 04 22:33:46 +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Moving to directories carrying the download origin in the path, or
> encoding the same information into the filename - that really does not
> make a big difference. In contrary, And I can also imagine a worst case
> where the encoded name ca
#include
* Daniel Richard G. [Tue, Apr 04 2006, 12:57:40PM]:
> Same situation here as Tony's (Debian + Ubuntu), using path_map. My
> solution was to run two separate instances of apt-cacher, but having one
> handle both would be preferable.
>
> > Now I can change the code a bit to not remove the
Same situation here as Tony's (Debian + Ubuntu), using path_map. My
solution was to run two separate instances of apt-cacher, but having one
handle both would be preferable.
> Now I can change the code a bit to not remove the parent directories
> when storing the files. However the next problem a
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 08:19:45AM +1100, Tony and Robyn Lewis wrote:
> In case you're saying that I shouldn't be mixing debs from different
> distros installed on the one box, you're right, and I'm not. I'm
> running a mixed Debian and Ubuntu network, and would love apt-cacher
> goodness on bo
Matt Zimmerman wrote:
This is only one of many reasons why mixing repositories from different
distributions is not a good idea. You wouldn't mix Fedora and SuSE RPMs
even though the packaging format is the same; it's equally problematic with
Debian and Ubuntu.
I *think* you're saying that
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 11:15:05AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Tony Lewis [Thu, Mar 02 2006, 03:17:18PM]:
> > Package: apt-cacher
> > Version: 1.5.1
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > *** Please type your report
> >
> > I am caching (amongst others) debian testing and ubuntu dapper
> >
#include
* Tony Lewis [Thu, Mar 02 2006, 03:17:18PM]:
> Package: apt-cacher
> Version: 1.5.1
> Severity: normal
>
> *** Please type your report
>
> I am caching (amongst others) debian testing and ubuntu dapper repositories.
> When a package
> exists in both, and the package has exactly the s
Package: apt-cacher
Version: 1.5.1
Severity: normal
*** Please type your report
I am caching (amongst others) debian testing and ubuntu dapper repositories.
When a package
exists in both, and the package has exactly the same filename, the second
repository that tries
to use it does not downl
11 matches
Mail list logo
