Menu
▾
▴
apt-proxy-users — Users of apt-proxy
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2000 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 |
Jan
|
Feb
(5) |
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(2) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2002 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
(14) |
Apr
(1) |
May
(7) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(7) |
Aug
(13) |
Sep
(21) |
Oct
(3) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2003 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(5) |
Oct
(5) |
Nov
|
Dec
(3) |
| 2004 |
Jan
(11) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
|
May
(9) |
Jun
|
Jul
(1) |
Aug
(12) |
Sep
(6) |
Oct
(7) |
Nov
(10) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2005 |
Jan
(22) |
Feb
(20) |
Mar
(5) |
Apr
(10) |
May
(15) |
Jun
(14) |
Jul
(9) |
Aug
(3) |
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(12) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(5) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(2) |
Oct
|
Nov
(2) |
Dec
(2) |
| 2007 |
Jan
|
Feb
(3) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Chris H. <ha...@de...> - 2004-01-20 15:08:58
|
On Tue, 2004-01-20 at 15:52, mi wrote:
> Chris Halls wrote:
> >>* Can i delete the dkg-name.links directory which apt-proxy-import creates
> >> (containing links to apt cache) manually ?
> > Yes. Normally it would be deleted anyway (maybe it was interrupted)?
> ok.
> I used a-p-import two times, one with 'debug' option and one without
> any option,
> and both times it created the link dir without removing it.
That's odd. The code only leaves the directory if the DEBUG variable is
set:
# remove directory if not debugging
[ -z "$DEBUG" ] && rm -rf "$APT_PROXY_CACHE/dpkg-name.links/"
> Would there be a problem if unattached links pile up there,
> after cleaning the apt-cache ?
No because that directory is only used by a-p-i
> > Not really. It will eventually clean the files up, but you can clean
> > them by hand too, if you want.
> ok.
> I just see a-p creates a 'packages.gz' as well as a 'packages' by
> default, when updating from the net.
> Why redundancy ?
If you are using an rsync backend, it is more efficient to rsync
'Packages', so it does that, and then uses gzip to make a Packages.gz to
send to clients.
> One more question, for gnome2.2 backport i got a 'Release.nonexist'.
> Is this a problem somehow ? I mean, there must be some good reason for
> a release file ?
> Package download to clients seem to work, though.
It's not a big problem - a Release file contains extra information about
a backend but is not essential. a-p cache's the fact that the Release
file does not exist so it does not have to try the backend too
frequently.
> > If you're just starting out with apt-proxy, you might want to try the
> > python rewrite, which is available from experimental and is much quicker
> > than v1.
> ok, but what do you mean with experimental ? Debian Sid ?
No, see:
http://www.de.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-resources#s-experimental
> I don't want to ditch woody/stable, hopefully a-p-2 runs under woody
> as well ?
Oh, it needs twisted, which was not available in Woody, so no you can't
use it I'm afraid.
> Will i have to do something for a smooth transfer ?
ap2 does have upgrade scripts and should automatically update for you,
but it needs more testing.
> I'll look for the a-p website, anyway.
That's a little out of date at the moment.
> > Apt-proxy-users mailing list
> > Apt...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apt-proxy-users
> You should add the website here.... for now i have to google ;-)
http://apt-proxy.sf.net
I don't have control over the footer mails added by the sourceforge
mailing list software, sorry.
Chris
|
|
From: mi <mic...@gm...> - 2004-01-20 14:52:42
|
Chris Halls wrote: >>* Can i delete the dkg-name.links directory which apt-proxy-import creates >> (containing links to apt cache) manually ? > Yes. Normally it would be deleted anyway (maybe it was interrupted)? ok. I used a-p-import two times, one with 'debug' option and one without any option, and both times it created the link dir without removing it. Would there be a problem if unattached links pile up there, after cleaning the apt-cache ? It's a-p-import 1.16.2.2 2002/11/15, and i run Debian Woody 3.0r2. >>ls -l /var/cache/apt-proxy/debian/dists/woody/main/binary-i386/ >>-rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 6,3M 2004-01-15 03:42 Packages >>-rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 1,7M 2003-11-20 19:17 Packages.gz >>-rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 0 2004-01-19 04:30 >>Packages.gz.fail >>-rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 95 2003-11-20 19:57 Release >>-rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 0 2004-01-19 04:30 Release.fail >> Is there any problem with this ? > Not really. It will eventually clean the files up, but you can clean > them by hand too, if you want. ok. I just see a-p creates a 'packages.gz' as well as a 'packages' by default, when updating from the net. Why redundancy ? One more question, for gnome2.2 backport i got a 'Release.nonexist'. Is this a problem somehow ? I mean, there must be some good reason for a release file ? Package download to clients seem to work, though. > If you're just starting out with apt-proxy, you might want to try the > python rewrite, which is available from experimental and is much quicker > than v1. ok, but what do you mean with experimental ? Debian Sid ? I don't want to ditch woody/stable, hopefully a-p-2 runs under woody as well ? Will i have to do something for a smooth transfer ? I'll look for the a-p website, anyway. > Apt-proxy-users mailing list > Apt...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apt-proxy-users You should add the website here.... for now i have to google ;-) Thanks for reply. -- mi. |
|
From: Chris H. <ha...@de...> - 2004-01-20 09:03:27
|
Hi, On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 20:53, mi wrote: > * When ditching a whole section (e.g., changing 'security > stable/updates' to > 'security woody/updates') or upgrading to a new dist-release > (e.g. from woody to sarge), can i delete all related files in > the cache manually ? Yes, that's fine. a-p will happily reconstruct anything it needs, as long as you don't remove the /var/cache/apt-proxy directory itself (which it doesn't have permission to recreate). > * Can i delete the dkg-name.links directory which apt-proxy-import creates > (containing links to apt cache) manually ? Yes. Normally it would be deleted anyway (maybe it was interrupted)? > * I suppose, it's doing 'update packages list' from a LAN client, when > the proxy > is _not_ online, which left stuff like this in the packages cache: > > ls -l /var/cache/apt-proxy/debian/dists/woody/main/binary-i386/ > -rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 6,3M 2004-01-15 03:42 Packages > -rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 1,7M 2003-11-20 19:17 Packages.gz > -rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 0 2004-01-19 04:30 > Packages.gz.fail > -rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 95 2003-11-20 19:57 Release > -rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 0 2004-01-19 04:30 Release.fail > > Is there any problem with this ? Not really. It will eventually clean the files up, but you can clean them by hand too, if you want. If you're just starting out with apt-proxy, you might want to try the python rewrite, which is available from experimental and is much quicker than v1. Chris |
|
From: mi <mic...@gm...> - 2004-01-19 19:54:04
|
Hello. I'm new on this list, and i didn't even read any mails from you.I subscribed because i recently decided to test apt-proxy 1.3.6 on my little home network of one PC and several laptops; and i have some questions. My boxes are all Debian 3.0r2 GNULinux, connected via standard ether100mbit, but the apt-proxy server host is on a slow dial up modem (around 6KByte/s). * When ditching a whole section (e.g., changing 'security stable/updates' to 'security woody/updates') or upgrading to a new dist-release (e.g. from woody to sarge), can i delete all related files in the cache manually ? * Can i delete the dkg-name.links directory which apt-proxy-import creates (containing links to apt cache) manually ? * I suppose, it's doing 'update packages list' from a LAN client, when the proxy is _not_ online, which left stuff like this in the packages cache: ls -l /var/cache/apt-proxy/debian/dists/woody/main/binary-i386/ -rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 6,3M 2004-01-15 03:42 Packages -rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 1,7M 2003-11-20 19:17 Packages.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 0 2004-01-19 04:30 Packages.gz.fail -rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 95 2003-11-20 19:57 Release -rw-r--r-- 1 aptproxy nogroup 0 2004-01-19 04:30 Release.fail Is there any problem with this ? tia ! -- mi. |
|
From: Chris H. <ha...@de...> - 2003-12-09 17:33:04
|
Hi lurkers,
Manuel is back and has made several updates to apt-proxy v2. It is now
available from the experimental section of the Debian mirrors. You can
add experimental to your sources.list with an entry like this:
deb http://hostname:9999/debian project/experimental/main/binary-$(ARCH)/
(Assuming that your backend to the debian repositories is called
'debian', and your local debian mirror does carry experimental). It
should be installable on sarge and unstable machines without much
difficulty.
Here's a rough summary of the differences between v1 and v2:
* Features
+ Uses python and the twisted framework - much faster, easier to
maintain and a smaller codebase
+ Uses databases to store information about files in the cache
instead of relying on atimes of the underlying filesystem
+ most configuration parameters can be individually set for each
backend.
+ udeb support
+ new config file format which is much easier to use, with automatic
upgrade/downgrade between v1 and v2 formats.
* Bugs present in v1 and fixed for v2
- Too many to list :D The most significant one is that v1 will hang
randomly when downloading. See bugs 187919, 203868, 164911, 171889,
175649 and others.
* Features not yet available in v2
- rsync backend support
- multiple backends - v2 can currently only use the first backend
listed
- apt-proxy-import is reimplemented but is known to have some bugs.
Those missing features can probably be implemented in time for sarge,
but we can't hope to replace v1 unless v2 has had plenty of testing. I
think that v2 is probably mature enough to enter unstable now, but I
would like some more feedback before making that decision.
So, Manuel & I would be grateful if people could try v2 (well, version
1.9.7 :) out and let us know about the results. In particular, is the
current version good enough to go into unstable yet, or are the missing
features too important?
The packaging will automatically upgrade your v1 configuration file for
you, creating a new file called apt-proxy-v2.conf. You can easily
downgrade again, and the older version will use your older
apt-proxy.conf. The cache directory format is compatible, provided that
your backend directory name is the same as the backend name, i.e. your
add_backend entries look like this:
add_backend /debian/ \
$APT_PROXY_CACHE/debian/ \
If your backend directory name is different, it is probably easiest to
change the directory name and adjust the configuration before you
upgrade.
Please report bugs using reportbug, and tag them with 'experimental'. I
will try and go through the list of older bugs soon to work out which
are fixed in v2 to make it easier to see which are still outstanding.
Thanks,
Chris & Manuel
|
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2003-12-09 17:32:10
|
Bugs item #787895, was opened at 2003-08-13 10:21 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by hartge You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=112078&aid=787895&group_id=12078 Category: None Group: None Status: Closed Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Submitted By: Sven Hartge (hartge) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: python2.3 transition breaks apt-proxy v2 Initial Comment: The recent python2.3 transition breaks apt-proxy v2, it cannot find apt_pkg any more, since it moved from the 2.2 packages dir to the one from 2.3. The attached patch makes apt-proxy use python2.3. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Sven Hartge (hartge) Date: 2003-12-09 18:32 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=97547 I have been tracking CVS HEAD, so your fix has been working for quite a while here. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Chris Halls (haggai) Date: 2003-12-09 18:21 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=161154 Hi, thanks for the report. apt-proxy 1.9.7 is available in experimental and works with python 2.3. We'd be glad to here how you get on. Thanks, Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=112078&aid=787895&group_id=12078 |
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2003-12-09 17:21:03
|
Bugs item #787895, was opened at 2003-08-13 10:21 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by haggai You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=112078&aid=787895&group_id=12078 Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Submitted By: Sven Hartge (hartge) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: python2.3 transition breaks apt-proxy v2 Initial Comment: The recent python2.3 transition breaks apt-proxy v2, it cannot find apt_pkg any more, since it moved from the 2.2 packages dir to the one from 2.3. The attached patch makes apt-proxy use python2.3. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Chris Halls (haggai) Date: 2003-12-09 18:21 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=161154 Hi, thanks for the report. apt-proxy 1.9.7 is available in experimental and works with python 2.3. We'd be glad to here how you get on. Thanks, Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=112078&aid=787895&group_id=12078 |
|
From: Gordon H. <go...@he...> - 2003-10-28 02:54:42
|
Hello, that for that, I couldn't find that, but it seems to be working now. Gordon. * Manuel Estrada Sainz (ran...@ra...) wrote: > On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 11:13:28PM +1100, Gordon Heydon wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I am having some problems with apt-proxy-v2. It was working great and > > then I installed the latest version of python-apt with was put against > > python2.3 and it hasn't worked since. I have triied rolling it back to > > the previous version but no such luck. I triied upgrading the cvs and > > again no luck. > > > > Can someone please help. > > > > Gordon. > > > > Below is the output from the apt-proxy-v2 log file. > > > [snip] > > File "/usr/lib/python2.2/shelve.py", line 77, in __setitem__ > > self.dict[key] = f.getvalue() > > bsddb.error: (22, 'Invalid argument') > > It is not about python-apt, the .db files got corrupted or are not > compatible with some upgrade. Just delete them and they will get > rebuilt over time: > > $cache_dir/.apt-proxy/db/* > > Have a nice day > > Manuel > -- > --- Manuel Estrada Sainz <ra...@de...> > <ra...@bi...> > <ra...@us...> > ------------------------ <man...@hi...> ------------------- > Let us have the serenity to accept the things we cannot change, courage to > change the things we can, and wisdom to know the difference. > -- Gordon Heydon <go...@he...> |
|
From: Manuel E. S. <ran...@ra...> - 2003-10-27 20:00:16
|
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 11:13:28PM +1100, Gordon Heydon wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am having some problems with apt-proxy-v2. It was working great and
> then I installed the latest version of python-apt with was put against
> python2.3 and it hasn't worked since. I have triied rolling it back to
> the previous version but no such luck. I triied upgrading the cvs and
> again no luck.
>
> Can someone please help.
>
> Gordon.
>
> Below is the output from the apt-proxy-v2 log file.
>
[snip]
> File "/usr/lib/python2.2/shelve.py", line 77, in __setitem__
> self.dict[key] = f.getvalue()
> bsddb.error: (22, 'Invalid argument')
It is not about python-apt, the .db files got corrupted or are not
compatible with some upgrade. Just delete them and they will get
rebuilt over time:
$cache_dir/.apt-proxy/db/*
Have a nice day
Manuel
--
--- Manuel Estrada Sainz <ra...@de...>
<ra...@bi...>
<ra...@us...>
------------------------ <man...@hi...> -------------------
Let us have the serenity to accept the things we cannot change, courage to
change the things we can, and wisdom to know the difference.
|
|
From: Gordon H. <go...@he...> - 2003-10-27 12:16:46
|
Hello,
I am having some problems with apt-proxy-v2. It was working great and
then I installed the latest version of python-apt with was put against
python2.3 and it hasn't worked since. I have triied rolling it back to
the previous version but no such luck. I triied upgrading the cvs and
again no luck.
Can someone please help.
Gordon.
Below is the output from the apt-proxy-v2 log file.
2003/10/27 22:56 EST [*AptProxy*] [recycle:9]RECYCLING:/debian/pool/contrib/t/tomcat4/tomcat4_4.1.24.orig.tar.gz
2003/10/27 22:56 EST [*AptProxy*] Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/python/log.py", line 52, in callWithContext
return context.call({ILogContext: newCtx}, func, *args, **kw)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/python/context.py", line 32, in callWithContext
return func(*args,**kw)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/internet/default.py", line 122, in run
self.mainLoop()
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/internet/default.py", line 130, in mainLoop
self.runUntilCurrent()
--- <exception caught here> ---
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/internet/base.py", line 368, in runUntilCurrent
call.func(*call.args, **call.kw)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/apt_proxy/misc.py", line 152, in process
self.factory.access_times[uri] = os.path.getatime(path)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/shelve.py", line 77, in __setitem__
self.dict[key] = f.getvalue()
bsddb.error: (22, 'Invalid argument')
2003/10/27 22:56 EST [FetcherHttp,client] Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/internet/default.py", line 472, in doSelect
_logrun(selectable, _drdw, selectable, method, dict)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/python/log.py", line 65, in callWithLogger
callWithContext({"system": lp}, func, *args, **kw)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/python/log.py", line 52, in callWithContext
return context.call({ILogContext: newCtx}, func, *args, **kw)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/python/context.py", line 32, in callWithContext
return func(*args,**kw)
--- <exception caught here> ---
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/internet/default.py", line 481, in _doReadOrWrite
why = getattr(selectable, method)()
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/internet/tcp.py", line 216, in doRead
return self.protocol.dataReceived(data)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/protocols/basic.py", line 184, in dataReceived
return self.rawDataReceived(data)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/apt_proxy/apt_proxy.py", line 504, in rawDataReceived
http.HTTPClient.rawDataReceived(self, data)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/protocols/http.py", line 354, in rawDataReceived
self.handleResponseEnd()
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/protocols/http.py", line 336, in handleResponseEnd
self.handleResponse(b)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/apt_proxy/apt_proxy.py", line 509, in handleResponse
self.apDataEnd(buffer)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/apt_proxy/apt_proxy.py", line 338, in apDataEnd
self.factory.file_served(self.request.uri)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/apt_proxy/apt_proxy.py", line 1418, in file_served
self.access_times[uri]=time.time()
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/shelve.py", line 77, in __setitem__
self.dict[key] = f.getvalue()
bsddb.error: (22, 'Invalid argument')
2003/10/27 22:56 EST [FetcherHttp,client] Stopping factory <twisted.internet.base.BCFactory instance at 0x83c27fc>
2003/10/27 23:06 EST [FetcherHttp,client] Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/internet/default.py", line 472, in doSelect
_logrun(selectable, _drdw, selectable, method, dict)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/python/log.py", line 65, in callWithLogger
callWithContext({"system": lp}, func, *args, **kw)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/python/log.py", line 52, in callWithContext
return context.call({ILogContext: newCtx}, func, *args, **kw)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/python/context.py", line 32, in callWithContext
return func(*args,**kw)
--- <exception caught here> ---
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/internet/default.py", line 481, in _doReadOrWrite
why = getattr(selectable, method)()
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/internet/tcp.py", line 216, in doRead
return self.protocol.dataReceived(data)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/protocols/basic.py", line 184, in dataReceived
return self.rawDataReceived(data)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/apt_proxy/apt_proxy.py", line 504, in rawDataReceived
http.HTTPClient.rawDataReceived(self, data)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/protocols/http.py", line 354, in rawDataReceived
self.handleResponseEnd()
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/twisted/protocols/http.py", line 336, in handleResponseEnd
self.handleResponse(b)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/apt_proxy/apt_proxy.py", line 509, in handleResponse
self.apDataEnd(buffer)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/apt_proxy/apt_proxy.py", line 338, in apDataEnd
self.factory.file_served(self.request.uri)
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/apt_proxy/apt_proxy.py", line 1418, in file_served
self.access_times[uri]=time.time()
File "/usr/lib/python2.2/shelve.py", line 77, in __setitem__
self.dict[key] = f.getvalue()
bsddb.error: (22, 'Invalid argument')
2003/10/27 23:06 EST [FetcherHttp,client] Stopping factory <twisted.internet.base.BCFactory instance at 0x841a52c>
--
Gordon Heydon <go...@he...>
|
|
From: Chris H. <ha...@de...> - 2003-10-22 18:43:34
|
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 10:00, Thomas Gebhardt wrote: > I have not noticed any release of the python apt-proxy v2 yet. > Apart from the mentioned flaw I'm very satisfied with apt-proxy > which helps to save a lot of bandwith. So I'd rather stay with > apt-proxy if I would have the hope that the problem is going to > be fixed. Manuel, who wrote ap2, has been very busy working on his diploma. He finished it a couple of weeks ago and is on holiday for a few weeks. He then plans to start work on ap2 again and hopes to maybe be ready for the Sarge release. I have been very busy with OpenOffice in Debian and have not spent much time on ap1. I did actually make modifications to fix the above problem, but ended up breaking other parts and abandoned them. ap2 didn't get uploaded as promised earler because there was a serious problem, where downloads would simply hang without reason. I was not able to find a problem in the ap2 code and Manuel was too busy to look. In fact, it was probably a problem in either twisted or python, because it now seems to work well with the current unstable and python 2.3. One of us will make some packages available soon; until then you can try it out by building a package based on a checkout from CVS. Chris |
|
From: Thomas A. <tan...@gr...> - 2003-10-02 20:14:12
|
On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 02:36:25PM -0500, Robert Guthrie wrote: > Your config settings look fine; have you tried increasing the value for > RSYNC_TIMEOUT? Seems a little short, and might have something to do > with my own problems. I'll start playing with it myself and see what I get. I've increased the timeouts (both) to 600, and it's made no difference. I noticed something funny though: the whole process gives up and dies, but still the modem lights flicker on and on. ps shows nothing so it's not rsync that's busy - netstat indicates one remaining connection. It's like the ftp/http session that's spawned is not communicating properly back that it's still busy ??? The other slightly odd thing is that I sometimes see two instances of rsync (with ps) both getting the same file. Does this make sense ? Does it split into junks ? -Thomas |
|
From: Robert G. <rgu...@po...> - 2003-09-30 19:37:05
|
The error you show below happens to me all of the time. I usually just run "apt-get update" again and it fixes the problem on it's own. I'm using the stable release of debian & the corresponding version of apt-proxy. Your config settings look fine; have you tried increasing the value for RSYNC_TIMEOUT? Seems a little short, and might have something to do with my own problems. I'll start playing with it myself and see what I get. |
|
From: Thomas A. <tan...@gr...> - 2003-09-28 18:09:04
|
I need some help to sort out this bizarre error condition which seems to be directly related to the speed at which I can download. Apt-proxy's Packages.gz files get corrupted every time the mirror changes - not all of them - just one or two. The only way I can fix the problem is to change BACKEND_FREQ=240 to BACKEND_FREQ=2 so that it forces a re-fetch of the Package lists, which in turn finds the ones that are truncated. It almost feels like something is getting tired of waiting, so it gives up, and doesn't finish the download. Is it maybe possible to get apt-proxy to download files one after the other, rather than in parallel? Sort of force it to finish one job at a time... I don't think it's apt-get at fault because once it's broken it repeats the pattern verbatim - just much quicker. Here are the details: When I run apt-get update I get this: 8<--------------------------------------------------------------- slink:~# apt-get update Get:1 http://gaspode.nextlink.co.za testing/main Packages [1129B] 98% [1 Packages gzip 0] [Waiting for file] gzip: stdin: unexpected end of file Err http://gaspode.nextlink.co.za testing/main Packages Sub-process gzip returned an error code (1) Hit http://gaspode.nextlink.co.za testing/main Release 8<--------------------------------------------------------------- This is the matching snippet from /var/log/apt-proxy.log: 8<--------------------------------------------------------------- [23072 19:20:10] Sun Sep 28 19:20:10 SAST 2003 Request /debian/dists/testing/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz [23072 19:20:10] Delivered partial file /var/cache/apt-proxy/debian/dists/testing/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz, from offset 0. gzip: /var/cache/apt-proxy/debian/dists/testing/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz: unexpected end of file [23072 19:20:11] Sun Sep 28 19:20:11 SAST 2003 Request /debian/dists/testing/main/binary-i386/Release 8<--------------------------------------------------------------- Here's my config: 8<--------------------------------------------------------------- APT_PROXY_CACHE=/var/cache/apt-proxy add_backend /debian/ \ $APT_PROXY_CACHE/debian/ \ http://ftp.debian.org/debian/ \ http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ \ http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/ \ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian/ \ +ftp.us.debian.org::debian/ add_backend /non-US/ \ $APT_PROXY_CACHE/non-US/ \ http://non-us.debian.org/ \ http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian-non-US/ \ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian-non-US/ \ +ftp.de.debian.org::debian-non-US/ add_backend /security/ \ $APT_PROXY_CACHE/security/ \ http://security.debian.org/ CLEANUP_DAYS=14 CLEAN_SWEEP=60 MAX_VERSIONS=2 BACKEND_FREQ=240 RSYNC_TIMEOUT=30 WGET_TIMEOUT=300 export http_proxy=http://localhost:8080/ export ftp_proxy=http://localhost:8080/ 8<--------------------------------------------------------------- Turning on debugging info didn't add anything particularly useful (to me anyway). Many thanks, Thomas |
|
From: Sven H. <sv...@ne...> - 2003-09-02 19:05:25
|
About a week ago I got atp-proxy 1.3.6 on woody working a bit better with Red Hat rpms. I made a patch and put it at: http://www.zen.org/~sven/blog/apt-proxy-patch.txt I only tested it with RPMs at from freshrpms.net though. But I get updates sooner then before. On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 05:11, Chris Halls wrote: > Hi Sven, > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 08:12:48PM -0500, Sven Heinicke wrote: > > I have been trying to get an apt-rpm shipped and running on woody (with > > proposed-updates) to work to a Red Hat apt-rpm install. > [...] > > First question is, am I on drugs for even trying this? I am willing to > > upgrade/build apt-proxy to unstable versions if I am not doing something > > stupid and people thing that it will help get apt-proxy working with > > apt-rpm. > > Well, I'm afraid that apt-proxy has not been tested with rpm files, and it > uses several properties of debs to optimise its operation. > > Having said that, you may find that the latest version in testing/unstable > (which will install on Woody without needing to upgrade anything else) will > provide basic rpm support for you, becuase it will treat any unknown file > types as binary files. There will be no special cache cleaning operations > such as MAX_VERSIONS, but CLEANUP_DAYS should still provide basic file > management. > > If you have further questions/problems, please post a log excerpt with > DEBUG=yes set in apt-proxy.conf. > > Chris |
|
From: Cristian B. <Cri...@ee...> - 2003-09-01 12:46:16
|
Hi, I manage somehow to install apt-proxy for redhat I put into /etc/apt-proxy/apt-proxy.conf this lines add_backend /redhat/ $APT_PROXY_CACHE/redhat/ http://apt.fhreshrpms.net/redhat/ and client looks like this: rpm http://server:9999/7.3/en/i386/ os udaptes freshrpms When I try to apt-get update it says: Ign http://server os release Err http://server os/updates pkglist 404 Unkown extension How could I make it work ? Thank you |
|
From: Cristian B. <Cri...@ee...> - 2003-09-01 11:02:42
|
Hi, I try to figure out how to install and run apt-proxy on a redhat machine = for RH repository and I really don't know how. Any suggestion where = should I start reading from are welcome. Thank you very much |
|
From: <ste...@in...> - 2003-01-09 15:39:28
|
Helloo. I must pass through a windows machine to go on the net. How can i do include it in my apt-proxy-v2.conf to download with thaht machine. Actually i test export http_proxy etc... but no success... Thanks for any idea. -- St=E9phane Trainel 02 99 29 33 20 - 06 61 94 42 70 =20 |
|
From: Sven H. <sv...@ne...> - 2003-01-08 21:00:51
|
I installed apt-proxy from sid and I was able to get everything to work with apt-rpm. I think what actually help me about the newer version is the better debug output. But apt-proxy 1.3.5 works with apt-rpm stuff anyway. Sven |
|
From: Chris H. <ha...@de...> - 2003-01-07 10:11:57
|
Hi Sven, On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 08:12:48PM -0500, Sven Heinicke wrote: > I have been trying to get an apt-rpm shipped and running on woody (with > proposed-updates) to work to a Red Hat apt-rpm install. =20 [...] > First question is, am I on drugs for even trying this? I am willing to > upgrade/build apt-proxy to unstable versions if I am not doing something > stupid and people thing that it will help get apt-proxy working with > apt-rpm. Well, I'm afraid that apt-proxy has not been tested with rpm files, and it uses several properties of debs to optimise its operation. Having said that, you may find that the latest version in testing/unstable (which will install on Woody without needing to upgrade anything else) will provide basic rpm support for you, becuase it will treat any unknown file types as binary files. There will be no special cache cleaning operations such as MAX_VERSIONS, but CLEANUP_DAYS should still provide basic file management. If you have further questions/problems, please post a log excerpt with DEBUG=3Dyes set in apt-proxy.conf. Chris |
|
From: Sven H. <sv...@ne...> - 2003-01-07 01:13:02
|
Hi,
I have been trying to get an apt-rpm shipped and running on woody (with
proposed-updates) to work to a Red Hat apt-rpm install. My add_backend
entry is:
add_backend /redhat/ \
$APT_PROXY_CACHE/redhat/ \
http://apt.freshrpms.net/
and on the red hat system the /etc/apt/sources.list file looks like:
rpm http://chef.nj.nec.com:9999/redhat redhat/8.0/en/i386 os
where chef is stable woody server. I'm using the apt-rpm downloaded
from: http://apt-rpm.tuxfamily.org/
and have tried the tuxfamily URL in the apt-proxy.conf to no luck.
First question is, am I on drugs for even trying this? I am willing to
upgrade/build apt-proxy to unstable versions if I am not doing something
stupid and people thing that it will help get apt-proxy working with
apt-rpm.
Sven
|
|
From: Chris H. <ha...@de...> - 2003-01-06 10:10:06
|
Hi Gerhard, On Sat, Jan 04, 2003 at 09:01:10AM +0100, Gerhard Tonn wrote: > I have installed apt-proxy recently and I am wondering if there is a=20 > configuration parameter max. cache size or when apt-proxy recognizes that= =20 > there isn't any more disk space available and starts to remove packages f= rom=20 > the cache. No, sorry there isn't such an option at present, although it has been on the wishlist in my head for a while. I've added it to the TODO list for version 2, which is quite long already. For now, your best option is to tune CLEANUP_DAYS and/or MAX_VERSIONS. Chris |
|
From: Gerhard T. <Ger...@sw...> - 2003-01-04 07:55:16
|
Hi, I have installed apt-proxy recently and I am wondering if there is a configuration parameter max. cache size or when apt-proxy recognizes that there isn't any more disk space available and starts to remove packages from the cache. Regards, Gerhard |
|
From: John H. <Joh...@tr...> - 2002-10-09 14:06:52
|
Chris, Thanks for the tips. However, I thought I would reply to complete the = picture now that I have solved my problem. It took a while for me to realise that the /etc/apt/sources.list could/shou= ld be the same for both the apt-proxy server and the client machines. My working sources.list now contains the following, where images is a DNS = alias pointing to my apt-proxy server: deb http://images:9999/main stable main contrib non-free deb http://images:9999/non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free deb-src http://images:9999/main stable main contrib non-free The broken sources.list contained the following: deb http://images:9999/debian stable main=20 The key difference was that 'debian' had to be changed to 'main' to get = everything working with apt-proxy 1.3.0. I didn't install apt-proxy from unstable, as I am not sure how to mix = unstable packages with stable ones yet. Regards, John ---- John Housden <joh...@tr...> Unix Support Analyst TRW Automotive, Westway House, Hither Green, Clevedon, North Somerset, BS21 6XU. Direct Tel: +44 1275 335342 Internal: x 2342 >>> Chris Halls <chr...@gm...> 09/27/02 07:48pm >>> Hi John, You need to edit /etc/apt-proxy/apt-proxy.conf. sources.list is only for apt, not for apt-proxy - the syntax is different. I would recommend you install version 1.3.3 (the version in unstable) - it has much improved documentation and works on Woody too. Chris ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Apt-proxy-users mailing list Apt...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apt-proxy-users |
|
From: Chris H. <chr...@gm...> - 2002-10-04 11:23:45
|
On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 08:24:42PM +1000, Debian User wrote: > While my entry in apt-proxy.conf is=20 >=20 > # KDE3 > # deb http://APTPROXY:9999/kde3 ./ > add_backend /kde3/ > $APT_PROXY_CACHE/kde/ > # http://kde3.geniussystems.net/debian > http://people.debian.org/~schoepf/kde3/woody apt-proxy.conf is a shell script, so you need to make sure that multi-line entries end with a backslash, you can't put a comment in the middle and URLs need to end in a slash. apt-proxy version 2 fixes these quirks but is still in alpha status. This is the correct syntax. I haven't checked if the backend path actually exists: --------------------- # KDE3 # deb http://APTPROXY:9999/kde3 ./ add_backend /kde3/ \ $APT_PROXY_CACHE/kde/ \ http://people.debian.org/~schoepf/kde3/woody/ # http://kde3.geniussystems.net/debian/ --------------------- Chris |
