Corey Wright wrote: > On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 20:04:27 +1100 > Declan Mullen <declan@jadplace.com> wrote: > > >> Corey Wright wrote: >> >>> and don't forget to use a caching/mirroring/saving proxy. i recently >>> gave up on apt-cache and went with the more generic http-replicator. a >>> proxy accelerates guest installs, security updates, and even "apt-get >>> update". it's also beneficial for rolling back to a previous package >>> version on debian unstable/testing (as the old version has probably >>> been removed from the archive and using snapshot.debian.net can be a >>> pain). >>> >> I was thinking of using apt-cacher, what types of problems prompted you >> to give up on it ? >> > > i'm an idiot! i meant "apt-proxy". > > apt-proxy does not support two clients downloaded the same file > concurrently. i never knew this because until lately i only ran a single > server. (all the vserver guests were updated sequentially using a script > executed on the debian host and my ubuntu desktops are updated randomly > enough based on when they are turned on.) and the version in stable has > been pretty "stable" but sometimes failed/cancelled downloads cause > apt-proxy to hang. the version in testing (which i run on my workstation, > servicing only my workstation), which will hopefully be the stable version > shortly, hangs once a week or so. the worst thing is the application is > still running and accepting connections from clients, but not downloading > any files. but the lack of concurrency (downloading the same file from two > different clients concurrently) was the proverbial "straw that broke the > camel's back". i created an init script for http-replicator and have been > using it successfully the last month or so without problem. > > yeah, there's approx, apt-cacher, etc, but in the end i figured something > that was designed for general use (not specifically apt repositories) would > be simpler and therefor conceivably work better (it does) and have broader > applicability if i needed it (eg fedora & yum, rhel & rhn). (i've > previously used it experimentally for saving windows update so that they > can later be applied manually if needed. "experimentally" not because there > were problems, but because i don't use windows enough to put it into > "production".) > > corey > Thanks for the insight on apt-proxy, I was also going to consider it too.