On Thu, 16 May 2002, jason andrade wrote: > Tbyte, yes. /whack self for not remember TB vs Tb. Obviously not all of > that is debian, but it's a significant percentage now.
Welp, that is a pretty big number then. Lots of ram and a fast disk array I hope. > > Nope. Only http get. One big warning though, if you are using a web server > > other than apache it may be slightly buggy and people using it with APT > > may get upset. In the past servers have had problems with HTTP/1.1 > > If-Range, pipelining and keepalive that APT makes heavy use of. > hmm, i'll have to chat to the boa author about this. Boa eh. Interesting choice. In the past it did have large numbers of problems. I think most of them were solved - but I don't know if those patches made it into the tree you are using. > at the moment, my primary concern is still to figure out some way of > dealing with lack of 302 support for .gz file fetches by apt. i don't > suppose you feel like just deciding to not have any .gz files in > the debian archive instead (i.e just leave Packages* everywhere > uncompressed) :-) Er? Why? Jason -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
