igabytes
- the change on release day is likely to be fairly extreme as links change
over.
OVH - like many hosting providers - already provide a full Debian mirror to
their customers on "local network" in the data centres, as it were so maybe
another mirror based on their infrstructur
On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 20:20:11 -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside
wrote:
>No, I ain't talking about derivatives of Debian. I talking about a
>mirror by itself, like all the other one around (ftp.xx.debian.org).
What advantage would the world have with just another mirror? Is it in
a unique plac
Hi,
> If you are talking about a separate repository to the existing
> repository, that sounds like a Debian derivative. Personally I would
> encourage people to contribute to Debian rather than starting new
> derivatives, except for experiments that will be re-integrated into
> Debian.
>
> https
On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 10:51 PM Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote:
> I'd like to setup a Debian repository for the community
If you are talking about a Debian mirror, there are some resources here:
https://www.debian.org/mirror/
If you are talking about a separate repositor
Hi !
I'm currently renting a server in a rack.
It's not overly powerful but still does the job.
I'd like to setup a Debian repository for the community but maybe this
will take too much bandwidth. Yes, what I got is unlimited but I must
respect a fair use policy. So if someone has some stats about
Hi !
On 2021-05-17 11:17 p.m., Sandro Tosi wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:09 PM Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi !
>> Maybe this is not the good mailing list, if so, please let me know which
>> one to go to.
>> I am making a copy of the Debian repository.
>> In the past I us
Hi !
Maybe this is not the good mailing list, if so, please let me know which
one to go to.
I am making a copy of the Debian repository.
In the past I used both debmirror and aptly.
With aptly, I can get a possibility to make snapshot.
But I need to sign the new mirror with my own key and it can't
Hi Vincent (and anyone else reading this),
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 01:05:51AM +0100, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> As a side note, it is really sad that APT imposes a 1min timeout
> for such problem. I proposed a patch in #668948 but never got any
> feedback :-(
You are like most people under the im
Le 08/02/2017 à 01:05, Vincent Danjean a écrit :
> However, the machine answers to IPv4 connections but not to IPv6
> $ time wget -4 ftp.fr.debian.org
> --2017-02-08 00:53:54-- http://ftp.fr.debian.org/
> Résolution de ftp.fr.debian.org (ftp.fr.debian.org)… 212.27.32.66
> Connexion à ftp.fr.debian
> Vincent Danjean, on Wed 08 Feb 2017 01:05:51 +0100, wrote:
>> However, the machine answers to IPv4 connections but not to IPv6
>> $ time wget -6 ftp.fr.debian.org
>> --2017-02-08 00:53:58-- http://ftp.fr.debian.org/
>> Résolution de ftp.fr.debian.org (ftp.fr.debian.org)… 2a01:e0c:1:1598::2
>> Co
Vincent Danjean, on Wed 08 Feb 2017 01:57:02 +0100, wrote:
> I had this problem at work this afternoon (ie with Renater routing,
> 2001:660:5301:: prefix)
No problem from 2001:660:6101::/48
Samuel
Le 08/02/2017 à 01:17, Samuel Thibault a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> Vincent Danjean, on Wed 08 Feb 2017 01:05:51 +0100, wrote:
>> However, the machine answers to IPv4 connections but not to IPv6
>> $ time wget -6 ftp.fr.debian.org
>> --2017-02-08 00:53:58-- http://ftp.fr.debian.org/
>> Résolution de ft
Hello,
Vincent Danjean, on Wed 08 Feb 2017 01:05:51 +0100, wrote:
> However, the machine answers to IPv4 connections but not to IPv6
> $ time wget -6 ftp.fr.debian.org
> --2017-02-08 00:53:58-- http://ftp.fr.debian.org/
> Résolution de ftp.fr.debian.org (ftp.fr.debian.org)… 2a01:e0c:1:1598::2
> C
Hi,
I'm writing to this list to know where to report the following
problem.
I'm using ftp.fr.debian.org as a mirror on several of my machines.
This is a CNAME to a machine of a French ISP:
$ dig -t any ftp.fr.debian.org
[...]
ftp.fr.debian.org. 1894IN CNAME debian.proxad.net
up debian testing it cost a lot of time to find a debian mirror
> which supports IPV6 connections 'cause the first selection is ipv4 only.
>
> I think, it should changed as soon as possible - or mark ipv6 enabled mirrors
> in mirror selection tool on install please.
The bug tit
Processing control commands:
> reassign -1 mirrors
Bug #737000 [general] general: Most used german debian mirror
(ftp.de.debian.org) has no IPV6
Bug reassigned from package 'general' to 'mirrors'.
Ignoring request to alter found versions of bug #737000 to the same values
debian mirror
which supports IPV6 connections 'cause the first selection is ipv4 only.
I think, it should changed as soon as possible - or mark ipv6 enabled mirrors
in mirror selection tool on install please.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
APT prefers testing-updates
Yasuhiro Araki dijo [Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 07:53:21AM +0900]:
> Example of configuration lines are followings for unam.mx.
>
> $addr_db = {
> "133.248.0.0/16" => { # => Request from 133.248.0.0/16
>#For example, DNS client's IP is
>
Florian Weimer:
* ARAKI Yasuhiro:
Do you like cdn.debian.net's idea and implementation?
Sorry if I sound like a broken record. What kind of software do you
use?
Is this just DNS-Balance plus a handful of scripts?
Patially right.
cdn.d.n is consisted by
-(modifiled) DNS-balance to return DN
* ARAKI Yasuhiro:
> Do you like cdn.debian.net's idea and implementation?
Sorry if I sound like a broken record. What kind of software do you
use?
Is this just DNS-Balance plus a handful of scripts?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Conta
Hi,
On 2/17/08, Leo costela Antunes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This CDN checks your hosts DNS query to retrive your national location.
> - If your located country has Debian Mirror, return this mirror site IP
address.
> - If your located continent has Debian Mirror, return t
Hi,
On 2/19/08, Gunnar Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FWIW, thanks for implementing a great idea :) This might be specially
> useful for laptop users who often connect from different countries :)
> The implementation also gives me some strange results: From my
> workstation, in the 132.248. cl
ARAKI Yasuhiro dijo [Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 07:53:06PM +0900]:
> Hi all,
> I am a member of debian mirror administration team in Japan.
>
> I announce I start cdn.debian.net.
>
> At 2008-Feb-05, we had started "cdn.debian.org" on global Debian Mirrors.
>
> Th
On Feb 18, 2008 8:49 AM, Yasuhiro Araki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Because cdn.d.n uses DNS query only. Then cdn.d.n can not detect architecture.
> If possible, we can make CDN for each architecture (cf. cdn-i386.d.n).
Already solved, see:
-geomirror.debian.net
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi,
On 2/18/08, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 03:35:08PM +0100, Leo costela Antunes wrote:
> > [No need to CC me, I'm subscribed. Keeping the other CCs since I don't
> > know about their subscription status.]
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > ARAKI Yasuhiro wrote:
> > > I ann
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> And it looks to me like the mirror should also be available via
> "/debian".
Oh-oh... I hadn't thought about this problem too.
Well, I guess it's something that could be asked of the local
mirror-admin. If they want their mirror to be a part of the automatic
rotation they cou
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 03:35:08PM +0100, Leo costela Antunes wrote:
> > - If your located continent has Debian Mirror, return this mirror
> > site IP address.
>
> I don't think this is a good logic for many situations.
> For instance: Brazil is in South America, but
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 03:35:08PM +0100, Leo costela Antunes wrote:
> [No need to CC me, I'm subscribed. Keeping the other CCs since I don't
> know about their subscription status.]
>
> Hi
>
> ARAKI Yasuhiro wrote:
> > I announce I start cdn.debian.net.
>
> You could have announced work on th
.
> - If your located country has Debian Mirror, return this mirror site IP
> address.
> - If your located continent has Debian Mirror, return this mirror site IP
> address.
I don't think this is a good logic for many situations.
For instance: Brazil is in South America, but it does
t Sun, 17 Feb 2008 13:08:39 +0100,
Vincent Bernat wrote:
>
> 61.115.118.67 is ftp.de.debian.org. I am located in France with an IP
> address of one of the largest ISP here. This ISP is hosting an official
> Debian mirror.
OK. However, your received result is right.
Because currentrl
OoO Peu avant le début de l'après-midi du dimanche 17 février 2008, vers
13:46, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait:
> 61.115.118.67 is hanzubin.st.wakwak.ne.jp. I think the whole lists
> you show there are Japanese servers. ftp.de.debian.org is 141.76.2.4
> which is the one I get while being
OoO Peu avant le début de l'après-midi du dimanche 17 février 2008, vers
13:58, William Pitcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> disait:
>> 61.115.118.67 is ftp.de.debian.org. I am located in France with an
>> IP address of one of the largest ISP here. This ISP is hosting an
&g
Hi,
On Sun, 2008-02-17 at 13:08 +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> 61.115.118.67 is ftp.de.debian.org. I am located in France with an
> IP
> address of one of the largest ISP here. This ISP is hosting an
> official
> Debian mirror.
61.115.118.67 is assigned to ASNIC, so there is
eb.cdn.araki.net has address 133.50.218.117
> > deb.cdn.araki.net has address 133.50.218.117
> >
> > 61.115.118.67 is ftp.de.debian.org. I am located in France with an IP
> > address of one of the largest ISP here. This ISP is hosting an official
> > Debian mirror.
>
located in France with an IP
> address of one of the largest ISP here. This ISP is hosting an official
> Debian mirror.
61.115.118.67 is hanzubin.st.wakwak.ne.jp. I think the whole lists
you show there are Japanese servers. ftp.de.debian.org is 141.76.2.4
which is the one I get while bei
i.net has address 133.50.218.117
deb.cdn.araki.net has address 133.50.218.117
61.115.118.67 is ftp.de.debian.org. I am located in France with an IP
address of one of the largest ISP here. This ISP is hosting an official
Debian mirror.
geoiplookup gives me:
GeoIP Country Edition: FR, France
I
Hi all,
I am a member of debian mirror administration team in Japan.
I announce I start cdn.debian.net.
At 2008-Feb-05, we had started "cdn.debian.org" on global Debian Mirrors.
This CDN checks your hosts DNS query to retrive your national location.
- If your located country has Deb
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 12:25:21AM +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Pe?a wrote:
> > Well, at least it was different... ftp.debian.org is an even more horrible
> > default, because that's burdering one single machine maxing out its FE card,
> > where we have a network of >300 mirrors out there that
On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 07:48:59PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Well, at least it was different... ftp.debian.org is an even more horrible
> default, because that's burdering one single machine maxing out its FE card,
> where we have a network of >300 mirrors out there that are mostly happy
> to sha
On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 09:50:23AM -0600, Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
> > debootstrap:
> > uses ftp.debian.org as default mirror.
>
> debconf questions aside, I think ftp.debian.org is a much saner *default*
> than ftp.jp.debian.org. I've always wondered where the later silly default
> came fr
Hi,
>
> d-i uses the following hack to figure out where to download udebs from
> when building installation media:
>
> grep '^deb[ \t]' $(SYSTEM_SOURCES_LIST) \
> |grep -v '^deb[ \t]cdrom:' \
> |grep -v
> '\(security.debian.org\|volatile.debian.\(
Hi,
> > After 6 years or so of setting ftp.jp.debian.org as default for
> > pbuilder, I'm finally determined that it shouldn't stay like this. So
> > I'd like to have some default guessing to happen. Preferably I don't
> > want to ask via debconf, since users should have already answered the
> >
On Sun, 2007-05-27 at 19:49 +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Sunday 27 May 2007 19:43, Joey Hess wrote:
> > d-i uses the following hack to figure out where to download udebs from
> > when building installation media:
>
> Note that this can result in multiple sources. If you want only one, this
> hack
al users - so long as our error handing is clear we
should be OK. Things like "This is really slow compared to normal
downloads from my mirror" are probably just as likely.
Things like adjusting Debian mirror URLs to include the requested
architecture seem reasonable but for local m
On Sun, 27 May 2007 22:42:41 +0300
Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On su, 2007-05-27 at 20:06 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Unless your own mirror supports all Debian architectures, you will
> > still need a primary for emdebian-tools. Do you test build your own
> > Debian packages a
On Sun, 27 May 2007 20:53:18 +0100
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 12:25:50AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > After 6 years or so of setting ftp.jp.debian.org as default for
> > pbuilder, I'm finally determined that it shouldn't stay like this.
> > So I'd like
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 12:25:50AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> After 6 years or so of setting ftp.jp.debian.org as default for
> pbuilder, I'm finally determined that it shouldn't stay like this. So
> I'd like to have some default guessing to happen. Preferably I don't
> want to ask via debcon
On su, 2007-05-27 at 20:06 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> Unless your own mirror supports all Debian architectures, you will
> still need a primary for emdebian-tools. Do you test build your own
> Debian packages against your own mirror? Is that wise?
I don't use emdebian in any way, so any require
On Sun, 27 May 2007 21:01:19 +0300
Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On su, 2007-05-27 at 18:05 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > That would be very handy! The default could then be the
> > closest/quickest primary mirror. It would be important (from my
> > perspective) that this default i
On su, 2007-05-27 at 18:05 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> That would be very handy! The default could then be the
> closest/quickest primary mirror. It would be important (from my
> perspective) that this default is required to be a primary mirror -
> maybe offer the user only the list of primaries
On Sunday 27 May 2007 19:43, Joey Hess wrote:
> d-i uses the following hack to figure out where to download udebs from
> when building installation media:
Note that this can result in multiple sources. If you want only one, this
hack would need to be refined.
Cheers,
FJP
pgpKGmesG3WSG.pgp
Desc
Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Looking for prior art I found the following:
d-i uses the following hack to figure out where to download udebs from
when building installation media:
grep '^deb[ \t]' $(SYSTEM_SOURCES_LIST) \
|grep -v '^deb[ \t]cdrom:' \
|gre
On Sun, 27 May 2007 19:22:26 +0300
Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > emdebian-tools:
> > Using 'apt-cache policy' to obtain information
> > -> told on IRC that it loses port number info.
> > -> probably picks up security mirrors too, which
> >
Hi,
> > debootstrap:
> > uses ftp.debian.org as default mirror.
>
> debconf questions aside, I think ftp.debian.org is a much saner *default*
> than ftp.jp.debian.org. I've always wondered where the later silly default
> came from. =)
Good Trivia question. The reasons for using ftp.jp.deb
On ma, 2007-05-28 at 00:25 +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> piuparts:
> Looks at first 'deb' line from /etc/apt/sources.list
> -> Can't handle /etc/apt/sources.list.d
> -> Assumes that the top entry is the best
I didn't want to have piuparts use all sources.list en
On Sun, 27 May 2007 09:50:23 -0600
"Wesley J. Landaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 27 May 2007 09:25:50 Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> > After 6 years or so of setting ftp.jp.debian.org as default for
> > pbuilder, I'm finally determined that it shouldn't stay like this. So
> > I'd like to h
On Sunday 27 May 2007 09:25:50 Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> After 6 years or so of setting ftp.jp.debian.org as default for
> pbuilder, I'm finally determined that it shouldn't stay like this. So
> I'd like to have some default guessing to happen. Preferably I don't
> want to ask via debconf, since us
Hi,
After 6 years or so of setting ftp.jp.debian.org as default for
pbuilder, I'm finally determined that it shouldn't stay like this. So
I'd like to have some default guessing to happen. Preferably I don't
want to ask via debconf, since users should have already answered the
question at install
Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
A few more examples below. I think lzma isn't the right thing for the
archive. p7zip seems much faster, needs a lot less ram and compression
is similar.
> ..
>>> Should you be using the "-9" o
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> A few more examples below. I think lzma isn't the right thing for the
>>> archive. p7zip seems much faster, needs a lot less ram and compression
>>> is similar.
..
>> Should you be using the "-9" option? The lzma help output says this:
>>
>> -
Miles Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> A few more examples below. I think lzma isn't the right thing for the
>> archive. p7zip seems much faster, needs a lot less ram and compression
>> is similar.
> ...
>> Lzma: 34306752 Bytes
>> Compressing
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A few more examples below. I think lzma isn't the right thing for the
> archive. p7zip seems much faster, needs a lot less ram and compression
> is similar.
...
> Lzma: 34306752 Bytes
> Compressing : 19410 mrvn 0 376m 370m R 97.2 36.9 1:5
A few more examples below. I think lzma isn't the right thing for the
archive. p7zip seems much faster, needs a lot less ram and compression
is similar.
I didn't measure compression times as I find them somewhat
irelevant. A deb is compressed once but downloaded and decompressed a
million times.
Daniel Baumann wrote:
> For the KDE flavour, this takes less than two minutes for downloading
> the packages, but about 5 minutes for unpacking them.
Measured how? Much of the work that dpkg is doing when it prints
"Unpacking replacement foo ..." is not uncompressing.
--
see shy jo
signature.a
[ debian spamfilters do hate me, resend with different address. ]
Russell Coker wrote:
> Last time I checked the gzip source had no assembler optimisation for systems
> other than i386. So if your 3.2GHz machine (which obviously would be a P4 at
> least not an i386) is running the AMD64 instruc
Russell Coker wrote:
> Last time I checked the gzip source had no assembler optimisation for systems
> other than i386. So if your 3.2GHz machine (which obviously would be a P4 at
> least not an i386) is running the AMD64 instruction set then you could
> probably improve performance by running
Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Friday 19 January 2007 02:19, Daniel Baumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> For the KDE flavour, this takes less than two minutes for downloading
>> the packages, but about 5 minutes for unpacking them. This is done on a
>> reasonable fast i386 machine
On Friday 19 January 2007 02:19, Daniel Baumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For the KDE flavour, this takes less than two minutes for downloading
> the packages, but about 5 minutes for unpacking them. This is done on a
> reasonable fast i386 machine (3.2ghz, 1gb ram, two 250gb barracudas in
> rai
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> I'm not sure if the smaller size that LZMA allows is worth it if it then
> takes a lot longer to unpack files
Unfortunately, that is already the case today. I have a local mirror via
gigabit as I build multiple livecd images on a daily basis.
For the KDE flavour, this take
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 09:25:38AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > > I'm not sure if the smaller size that LZMA allows is worth it if
> > > it then takes a lot longer to unpack files, or if it becomes
> > > impossible to do so due to memory requirements.
> >
> > I don't know on memory re
Hi,
> > I'm not sure if the smaller size that LZMA allows is worth it if it then
> > takes a lot longer to unpack files, or if it becomes impossible to do so
> > due to memory requirements.
>
> i don't know on memory requirements. but i didn't notice any speed drawbacks
> for my personal use.
L
> Does LZMA have any drawbacks? According to Wikipedia[1,2] indicates that
> it is slower than gzip, at perhaps around half the speed, but that it
> may require a lot of memory to compress, but reasonably little to
> decompress.
According to my check last year and a few weeks or months:
http://www
On ma, 2007-01-15 at 14:31 +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 12:39:18PM +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> > Does LZMA have any drawbacks?
>
> It is far less deployed as bzip2, so manually unpacking .deb packages on
> some random GNU/Linux or Unix rescue system is more likely to f
On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 12:39:18PM +, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> Does LZMA have any drawbacks?
It is far less deployed as bzip2, so manually unpacking .deb packages on
some random GNU/Linux or Unix rescue system is more likely to fail.
Bzip2 is pretty ubiquitous these days, so comparing lzma num
ures might be a good release goal for lenny. I for
one wouldn't mind reducing the size of my personal Debian mirror.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LZMA
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_file_archivers
--
Fundamental truth #1: Complexity is the enemy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Since the day that dpkg officially supports lzma compressed packages, Gürkan
runs
a mirror of binary packages (i386, sid, main) which can be used easily. The
general save of downloading is about 30 %. The scripts how it is done and
the pool is here: http://gnu.ethz.ch/debian-lzma/
Gürkan
--
To
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 09:34:22AM -0500, Carlo Segre wrote:
...
> I have investigated this by grabbing individual files with wget and I have
> discovered that the same IP address is selected each time I run wget on a
> specific computer.
...
> Any insights? Is this a bug, if so for what packa
Em Ter, 2005-09-20 às 09:34 -0500, Carlo Segre escreveu:
> Any insights? Is this a bug, if so for what package?
I have no idea and haven't investigated what causes this, but it seems
like perfectly reasonable behaviour to me, for a simple reason: it's
more than one machine, and they all have to s
Hello All:
I have noticed a behavior which I can't quite understand. I
had noticed that some of my computers getting files from
http.us.debian.org had consistently lower bandwidths than others
pointed to the same source.
I have investigated this by grabbing individual files with wget and I
Johann Glaser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Goswin!
>
>> Afaik it is as simple as: The Filename entries are relative to the URL
>> you would put into the sources.list, as in:
>>
>> deb url path/
>> deb url dist +
>
> I see. But how does the mirror script know how the particular Packages
> file
Hi Goswin!
> Afaik it is as simple as: The Filename entries are relative to the URL
> you would put into the sources.list, as in:
>
> deb url path/
> deb url dist +
I see. But how does the mirror script know how the particular Packages
files are referenced from a (most probably remote) sources.l
Johann Glaser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi!
>
>> > I changed my script to check whether the "Filename:" field is with a
>> > './' in front or not. Works for now. Probably another tweaking will be
>> > necessary in the future, but currently it is ok.
>>
>> The ./ is a sideeffect of dpkg-scanpa
Hi!
> > I changed my script to check whether the "Filename:" field is with a
> > './' in front or not. Works for now. Probably another tweaking will be
> > necessary in the future, but currently it is ok.
>
> The ./ is a sideeffect of dpkg-scanpackages. You should not rely on
> that but just reim
Johann Glaser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi!
>
>> There are only 2 cases:
>>
>> Having 'dists///binary-/' in the path and not.
>>
>> You could have a Packages file with
>> 'dists///binary-/' that is used as if it hadn't
>> but that is rather unlikely.
>>
>> A good indication you are using a
Hi!
> There are only 2 cases:
>
> Having 'dists///binary-/' in the path and not.
>
> You could have a Packages file with
> 'dists///binary-/' that is used as if it hadn't
> but that is rather unlikely.
>
> A good indication you are using a Packages file wrong is also if all
> the packages it re
Jeroen van Wolffelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 05:54:27PM +0200, Johann Glaser wrote:
>> Is there a way to find out what the "base path" of a Packages file is
>> supposed to be?
>
> No
There are only 2 cases:
Having 'dists///binary-/' in the path and not.
You could
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 05:54:27PM +0200, Johann Glaser wrote:
> Is there a way to find out what the "base path" of a Packages file is
> supposed to be?
No
> > So all cases are explained by this or by the woody-proposed-updates
> > thingy.
>
> When will the woody-proposed-updates Packages files
Hi!
> The first few are not supposed to work with 'normal' sources.list
> entries, but with 'deb
> http:///debian/dists/sarge/main/update-kernel ./'.
I see, thanks.
Is there a way to find out what the "base path" of a Packages file is
supposed to be?
> So all cases are explained by this or by t
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 05:21:37PM +0200, Johann Glaser wrote:
> Jeroen wrote:
> > woody-proposed-updates got dropped because there is no more point
> > release of woody, so the proposed-updates of it simply are no longer
> > relevant.
>
> I see. Thus, I simply have to wait until woody-proposed-up
Johann Glaser wrote:
>Hi!
>
>
>Ok, great. Lets have a look. This is the output of my script checking
>our internal mirror. It searches all "Packages" files, filters the lines
>starting with "Filename:" and checks if these files are present. For a
>few weeks it complains about these missing files:
>
Hi!
> At least some of them are of woody-proposed-updates, which got dropped
> from the database, and hence from pool. Indeed, the corresponding
> Packages.gz files on the mirrors didn't get dropped yet, which is a
> minor bug.
>
> woody-proposed-updates got dropped because there is no more poin
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 05:02:56PM +0200, Johann Glaser wrote:
> Ok, great. Lets have a look. This is the output of my script checking
> our internal mirror. It searches all "Packages" files, filters the lines
> starting with "Filename:" and checks if these files are present. For a
> few weeks it c
Hi!
Am Montag, den 04.07.2005, 11:55 +0200 schrieb Goswin von Brederlow:
> Johann Glaser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > For a few weeks there are discrepancies between some "Packages" files
> > and the files in the ./pool/ directory. Unfortunately the debian-mirrors
> > list is dea
Johann Glaser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi!
>
> For a few weeks there are discrepancies between some "Packages" files
> and the files in the ./pool/ directory. Unfortunately the debian-mirrors
> list is dead since the end of 2003. Therefore I try to ask this list, if
> you know anything about
Hi!
For a few weeks there are discrepancies between some "Packages" files
and the files in the ./pool/ directory. Unfortunately the debian-mirrors
list is dead since the end of 2003. Therefore I try to ask this list, if
you know anything about this discrepancy, if you can point me where I
should a
> "Goswin" == Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Goswin> zsync uses the algorithm described in the rsync technical paper
Goswin> afaik. Does rsync have a patent issue? Do we realy care about some
Goswin> stupid countries patents?
My understanding is that rsync doesn'
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 11:05:56AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> zsync looks suspiciously like it might have similar patent issues
> which killed the rproxy project.
>
> Then again I am no expert; Please tell me I am wrong...
i'm not an expert either, but the zsync maintainer and i talked to a lot
of
Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Goswin" == Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Goswin> zsync has the option of looking into gziped files and
> Goswin> rsync them as if they would be ungziped (while still just
> Goswin> downloading chunks of the gziped fil
> "Goswin" == Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Goswin> zsync has the option of looking into gziped files and
Goswin> rsync them as if they would be ungziped (while still just
Goswin> downloading chunks of the gziped file). Its a bit more
Goswin> complex algorith
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Filippo Giunchedi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 11:59:20PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >> > Why there isn't there already a rsync method for apt is probably a
> >> > mystery nobody ever will solve.
> >>
> >> It i
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
