On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 07:18:38PM -0600, Scott Granneman wrote:
> david dooling is quite smart & i generally trust what he says,

Many thanks.

> but let 
> me just point out that by default ubuntu uses the multiple-line method, 
> so it can't be bothering their servers too much. :)

Please do not lose trust.  Note that I conditioned my statements with
``if''.  Robert did the real work and looked at the man page, showing
that the latter ``if'' I had suggested was the correct one.

<wink>
Perhaps I just trust Robert to research and confirm anything I say.

I promise to do better in the future.
</wink>

> Robert Citek wrote:
> > David Dooling wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 03:32:29PM -0600, Robert Citek wrote:
> >>> Is there any advantage/disadvantage to having repository components
> >>> in one line or several lines in a sources.list file?
> >> When downloading files, apt parallelizes by opening one conncetion
> >> per server.  If it considers each line in sources.list a different
> >> server, apt would connect four times to archive.ubuntu.com.  This may
> >> be considerd abuse by the folks at Ubuntu (although they probably
> >> would not even notice).  If apt does some sort of string comparison
> >> to determine unique hosts, then there should no difference.
> > 
> > According to the man page, apt is doing some collapsing:
> > 
> > <quote>
> > APT will sort  the  URI  list after  it has generated a complete set
> > internally, and will collapse multiple references to the same Internet
> > host, for instance, into a single connection, so that it does not
> > inefficiently establish an FTP connection, close it, do something else,
> > and then re-establish a connection to that same host.
> > </quote>
> > 
> > But then man pages are like comments in code: occasionally out of sync
> > with reality.  Which is why I was wondering if anyone knew of any
> > gotchas to using multiple lines.

-- 
David Dooling
 
_______________________________________________
CWE-LUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cwelug.org/
http://www.cwelug.org/archives/
http://www.cwelug.org/mailinglist/

Reply via email to