> Moving to PLUG where it belongs.
> 
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 at 11:33, Horatio B. Bogbindero wrote:
>> however, i am quite disappointed with debian. i like dpkg and
>> definitely love apt-get. however..first, debian is a humongous waste
>> of bandwidth and resources. i unendlessly complain about synchronizing
>> with external (US-based) debian mirrors and wasting precious IPL.
> 
> "waste" is relative. Perhaps to you it's a waste, and I don't blame
> you. To us, however, the bandwidth is secondary to the fact that I
> don't have to deal with what to me is RedHat Shit (tm). And no, I'm not
> talking about their name trademark. I'm talking about all the new stuff
> that keep creeping into their distributions making it continuously more
> difficult for me to keep installations lite. Then of course there's the
> fact that I'm not very happy with the way RPM handles system-wide
> updates and dependencies.
> 
however, as a systems administrator who would rather advocate fair use
of bandwidth resources in the university -- "waste" is entirely this though.

i have to admit that RH is quite crappy when is comes to releasing "stable"
distributions. hahaha. they should stop calling these "stable" though. 
hahaha.

>> i would rather have somebody give me instructions on how to mirror it
>> properly within campus and not have multiple people download the same
>> thing.
> 
> You can use rsync, I think, but then you're talking about I think
> around 100GB (if not more) to mirror all three Debian trees. :(
> 
this i would rather do than have each debian user in the university. 
currently, there are only two but i feel that this could grow and mirroring
would be a good idea. of course, apt-proxy would be a better idea (with
akamai, squid-http accelerator like intelligence). could you brief
me on how i could get apt-proxy to work?

as i said, i tried debian before. i just left because i got bored. i am
a "rawhide" and "cooker" kinda guy thus leading me to something 
called "sid". however, i had to connect to some externally located site
just to update? proxies are uber cool.

how big would the entire "sid" tree be? i do not have 100GB thus making
apt-proxy a better alternative.

>> adding to this is that fact that debian has this weird (i may learn to
>> appreciate it in the future) method for grouping applications (free,
>> non-US, etc...)
> 
> free and nonfree have everything to do with the Debian policy for free
> software. Which I admire Debian for. Unlike RedHat that ships the
> non-free Pine (which I still use by compiling my own via "apt-get
> source pine" hehehe). US and non-US are because of the pathetic export
> regulations that thankfully the US doesn't have anymore.
> 
ow. never really bothered to read the fine print though. hehehe. i just
find it strange. not is seems clearer.

>> second, debian has a turtle slow release cycle. this i really do not
>> mind but they should branch the trees at least.
> 
> Well, they -DO- branch the trees. There are three: Stable, Testing, and
> Unstable. These get various codenames as they go along but essentially
> you get the view of the stability of these trees, which is inversely
> proportional to their release cycles.
> 
>> if i downloaded the reasonably small and very stable debian 2.2rX i
>> would be limited to packages that are contained there and could not
>> experiment. however, it i want to be bleeding edge i have to apt-get
>> stuff from the humongous monstrosity of a branch called cid.
> 
> It's sid. And I find that unless you update your entire system (ie:
> apt-get dist-upgrade) to sync with the unstable tree every time, you
> won't be using -that- much of the humongous monstrosity that is
> Debian/Unstable. You don't have to download everything naman eh. You
> just download what you wanna upgrade. And you don't even have to
> download it yourself, apt does that for you.
> 
but, just for you. kinda selfish this way which i would rather avoid.
i wanted something communal. apt-proxy seems to be the answer to my
debian woes but.... sacha has not figured out how to get it working yet.

i would like a behaviour such that if i already download a particular 
package and then later somebody else downloads the same package it just
gets the package from a cache. this way i save bandwidth (or more like
efficiently use bandwidth)

>> for a bandwidth gifted institution, these are not problems. but, for a
>> regular modem user. how long will it take me to synchronize my
>> packages?
> 
> This is a valid point. And it's still on my Debian wishlist. But you
> can't have your cake and eat it too. The quick releaes cycles of
> RedHat, Mandrake, and company come with what I perceive as shit that
> I'd rather not deal with. So it's a choice of which you deal with and
> which you don't. :)
> 
>> (remember trying to do this during Linux10 at APC?)
> 
> Yeah. Futile. I should've brought CDs of a Sid snapshot.
> 
oo nga. this would have been better. hehehe. 

>> if somebody can propose a solution to these issues then maybe i can
>> try debian out again.
> 
> There are backports in the unofficial apt sources of various programs
> backported for the stable tree (currently Potato). Or as I said you can
> just apt-get from testing/unstable those apps that you want to upgrade,
> which doesn't have to be everything. Or you can get those snapshots of
> either the testing or unstable trees from Rene Torres.
> 

like i mentioned above. it is not about me downloading it is about somebody
inside the ateneo downloading. i would like things to be cached as much
as possible. apt-proxy seems to be the closest thing.

nice discussion here. but, i think i have said enough. 

-- 
William Emmanuel S. Yu
Systems Administrator on Leave

_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to