Do I? Maybe. I think that choosing a mirror is in fact choosing a single point of failure. Choosing any single system is a single point of failure. I'm really wondering why that is necessary and why there is not instead either a list of lists or a DNS entry that gets you to a list of lists. I'm not knowledgeable about DNS to know how *that* would work, but it must as, 'fer instance, I notice that doing something like "ping google.com" gets different addresses at different times.
jdd wrote: > Bruce A. Mallett wrote: > >> - Why is there a single point of failure such as this for getting >> packages? I've seen recommendations for choosing mirrors, but why >> should I have to bother with that? > > in the same sentence, you contredict yourself... > > if you don't want to bother with mirrors, there must be a single entry > point > > problem is this point should be unbreakable (server with a backup) > > (your other points are already known - badly) > > jdd > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
