Hi, Dato. On Mar 12 2009, Adeodato Simó wrote: > I’d recommend approx.
Thanks. That's what decided to use. > > * Is it able to cope with multiple architectures? > > * Can it support multiple distributions? Supporting Debian, Ubuntu and > > other non-official repositories would be really handy. > > * Does it keep a directory hierarchy neatly organized like the Debian > > archive? > > Yes, yes, and yes. Those things should be on the comparison of the lwn. Even better would be a chart listing all the weaknesses and strenghts of all solutions. > Additionally, I think this question is not completely OT here, since > (and Rogério confirmed it was for this purpose) a package cacher is an > essential tool in the life of every maintainer (or, at least, for the > intersection between those who care about building in a clean > environment, and those who can’t afford a local mirror). Indeed. It seems that this subject is of considerable importance for having been discussed on a lwn.net article and many threads on this very list and, since the programs have been refactored, improved etc, it seems that my question wasn't off-topic (especially for people who have to build their packages on a clean environment, like Dato has affirmed). Here are some quick references, but the list is sincerely not exhaustive. http://lwn.net/Articles/318658/ http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2008/09/msg00329.html Regards, Rogério Brito. -- Rogério Brito : rbr...@{mackenzie,ime.usp}.br : GPG key 1024D/7C2CAEB8 http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito : http://meusite.mackenzie.com.br/rbrito Projects: algorithms.berlios.de : lame.sf.net : vrms.alioth.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
