From: Martijn B. <e.a...@tn...> - 2004-05-03 22:18:07
|
Hi, I am running apt-proxy (the old version) on an old computer with debian woody. I noticed that dd consumes all cpu, which makes total performance poor (throughput of 20kb/s instead of 75kb/s). This is due to the ibs=1 option. Now I am considering using v2, but this one requires python 2.3 according to the info in the deb from experimental. Can I run this one on woody with python 2.1? Bye, Martijn Brouwer |
From: Chris H. <ha...@de...> - 2004-05-04 09:54:18
|
Hi Martijn, On Tue, 2004-05-04 at 00:16, Martijn Brouwer wrote: > I am running apt-proxy (the old version) on an old computer with debian > woody. I noticed that dd consumes all cpu, which makes total performance > poor (throughput of 20kb/s instead of 75kb/s). This is due to the ibs=1 > option. Oh, that's not good :( What happens if you try increasing the ibs and obs sizes to the length of the message? I don't know if this might work: Change dd ibs=1 obs=16384 skip=$2 count=$3 if="$1" 2>/dev/null To dd ibs=$(( $3 - $2 )) obs=$(( $3 - $2 )) skip=$2 count=$3 if="$1" 2>/dev/null > Now I am considering using v2, but this one requires python 2.3 > according to the info in the deb from experimental. Can I run this one > on woody with python 2.1? The main problem is not with the Python version, it is with the python-twisted version. Twisted wasn't really stable until around version 0.99, and Woody only has 0.15 AFAIK. I don't think apt-proxy has been tested with Python 2.1, and I don't know if there are any changes between 2.1 and 2.3 that would cause problems. You'd just have to try it and see what happens. Chris |
From: Martijn B. <e.a...@tn...> - 2004-05-05 12:53:45
|
Chris Halls wrote: >Hi Martijn, >On Tue, 2004-05-04 at 00:16, Martijn Brouwer wrote: > > >>I am running apt-proxy (the old version) on an old computer with debian >>woody. I noticed that dd consumes all cpu, which makes total performance >>poor (throughput of 20kb/s instead of 75kb/s). This is due to the ibs=1 >>option. >> >> > >Oh, that's not good :( > >What happens if you try increasing the ibs and obs sizes to the length >of the message? I don't know if this might work: > > I tried the your suggestion, and when I ran apt-get update I got this output: Get:2 http://server sarge/main Packages 99% [2 Packages gzip 0] [Connecting to server (192.168.0.1)] 66.1kB/s 0s gzip: stdin: invalid compressed data--format violated Err http://server sarge/main Packages Sub-process gzip returned an error code (1) Get:3 http://server sarge/main Release [81B] Err http://server sarge/non-free Packages 0 OK Get:4 http://server sarge/non-free Release [85B] Err http://server sarge/contrib Packages 0 OK Get:5 http://server sarge/contrib Release Fetched 3579kB in 1m29s (39.9kB/s) Failed to fetch http://server:9999/debian/dists/sarge/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz Sub-process gzip returned an error code (1) Failed to fetch http://server:9999/debian/dists/sarge/non-free/binary-i386/Packages.gz 0 OK Failed to fetch http://server:9999/debian/dists/sarge/contrib/binary-i386/Packages.gz 0 OK Reading Package Lists... Done W: Couldn't stat source package list http://server sarge/main Packages (/var/lib/apt/lists/server:9999_debian_dists_sarge_main_binary-i386_Packages) - stat (2 No such file or directory) W: Couldn't stat source package list http://server sarge/main Packages (/var/lib/apt/lists/server:9999_debian_dists_sarge_main_binary-i386_Packages) - stat (2 No such file or directory) W: You may want to run apt-get update to correct these problems E: Some index files failed to download, they have been ignored, or old ones used instead. But it was much faster :) Do you have another suggestion? About the python version: I do not want to mess up my server, so for the time being I will not swith to apt-proxy v2. Hopefully, sarge will be stable soon... Thanks for your help Martijn |
From: Chris H. <ha...@de...> - 2004-05-05 13:46:20
|
On Wed, 2004-05-05 at 14:52, Martijn Brouwer wrote: > E: Some index files failed to download, they have been ignored, or old > ones used instead. > > But it was much faster :) Do you have another suggestion? Oh :( No, sorry I'm not very familiar with dd. > About the python version: I do not want to mess up my server, so for the > time being I will not swith to apt-proxy v2. Hopefully, sarge will be > stable soon... I understand; although you could always set up a sarge chroot environment. It's reasonably easy, provided you have the disk space (um, around 200Mb I would guess) available. Assuming you use /chroot for the environment, replace MIRROR with your local debian mirror. This can be an apt-proxy (use HOSTNAME:9999): apt-get install debootstrap mkdir /chroot debootstrap sarge /chroot http://MIRROR/debian cp /etc/resolv.conf /chroot/etc/resolv.conf chroot /chroot echo 'deb http://MIRROR/debian sarge main' > /etc/apt/sources.list echo 'deb http://MIRROR/debian project/experimental/main/binary-$(ARCH)/' >> /etc/apt/sources.list apt-get update apt-get install apt-proxy/experimental Hope that helps, Chris |