On Sat, 30 Nov 2002, jason andrade wrote: > On Fri, 29 Nov 2002, Joey Hess wrote: > > > Many sites have old isos, or no isos, or a nonstandard directory > > structure or filenames, earning a 0 in the "binary" column. And of > > course a lot of mirrors don't have source. > > hmm, i have been skipping most of this thread. what new isos ? i > was under the impression (as of the last few years) that isos are > generated once for a release and unless there are some exceptional > circumstances are never regenerated without an increment of some > kind.
New isos as in 3.0. Many sites just carry 2.2_r[67]. > at ftp.au.debian.org, we generated the images using jigdo and then > did a final sync against the "authoritative" images at cdimage.debian.org. > > we never check after that for various reasons > > o images are never supposed to change > o there could be some problem at cdimage which would wipe out our > local archive also Yes, this is the good method of handling cdimage mirroring. > so has there been some fundamental shift in the way debian is producing > iso images - as evidenced by the very high number of sites below which > get a 0 in the binary column ? Just that cdimage.debian.org does not carry the images, just the jigdo files. That is enough to get most sites not updated. /Mattias Wadenstein -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
