Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Dan Ritter]

On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 10:10:01AM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Richard Owlett writes:
> > Quoting webopedia.com, "A local-area network (LAN) is a computer
> > network that spans a relatively small area."  The sticking point is an
> > unstated assumption - a LAN connects two *OR MORE* computers. I wish
> > to connect *EXACTLY* two computers {for which an RS232 null modem is
> > _topologically_ an excellent picture}.
> 
> If both computers have ethernet hardware you just need an ethernet
> cable.  With older hardware it may need to be a crossover cable (the
> ethernet equivalent of a null modem).  This establishes the most minimal
> LAN possible.

If they don't have ethernet ports but do have USB2.0 ports, then
they can have USB-ethernet ports for about $15 each. Then back
to John Hasler's solution.

-dsr-

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[John Hasler]

Richard Owlett writes:
> Quoting webopedia.com, "A local-area network (LAN) is a computer
> network that spans a relatively small area."  The sticking point is an
> unstated assumption - a LAN connects two *OR MORE* computers. I wish
> to connect *EXACTLY* two computers {for which an RS232 null modem is
> _topologically_ an excellent picture}.

If both computers have ethernet hardware you just need an ethernet
cable.  With older hardware it may need to be a crossover cable (the
ethernet equivalent of a null modem).  This establishes the most minimal
LAN possible.
-- 
John Hasler 
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI

-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/15/2018 04:09 AM, David wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 23:01, Richard Owlett  wrote:


I have no desire nor need for a traditional LAN.


Wanting to transfer or share data between machines, while simultaneously
declaring the above, appears inconsistent.

I don't know what a "traditional LAN" is,


Quoting webopedia.com, "A local-area network (LAN) is a computer network 
that spans a relatively small area."
The sticking point is an unstated assumption - a LAN connects two *OR 
MORE* computers. I wish to connect *EXACTLY* two computers {for which an 
RS232 null modem is _topologically_ an excellent picture}.



so I wonder what you mean by those
words, and what happened to create your attitude that you wish to avoid
whatever it is.


[For goals/environment - see end of post]


[snip]

I write this because I feel it's likely that that people's interest in
assisting you here will wane if you appear to reject well-known, simple,
widely used even by simpletons, best-practice for obscure reasons.


When I ask questions I try {and evidently fail} to narrowly describe the 
specific "factoid" desired. The confusion arises from the assumption 
that I'm working on a single project. I have several, some with mutually 
 contradictory goals.



[snip]


Now to a backgrounder.
Why use Linux and Debian in particular?
I got tired of Micro$soft thinking they knew more about my needs
than I did. I went looking for an "ideal OS. Asking for advice I was
pointed to Ubuntu finding Debian to be a better fit. Emdebian would
have been a good fit for my preferences if it was still current.

I found exploration of preseeding valuable for minimizing footprint
and having the packages I needed without the "clutter" of packages
of no interest nor use. I still have a mindset suggesting Emdebian.

I have a dormant project from that era to create a script to asking
questions to create a preseed configuration file - there was once a
website aimed in a similar direction encouraged me.

My environment
60" X 30" folding table
4 laptops with multiple configurations of multiple Debian releases.
1 desktop with WinXP Pro and 3 configurations of Debian Stretch.
{WinXP allows me to use some apps but requiring excessive effort to
move to a Linux machine. One is reported to not cooperate with wine.}

No more than 2 computers can be physically accessed at the same time.
The only common communication *hardware* is USB 2.0 .

There are some older tower type desktops in a back room whose only
bi-directional communication hardware is RS232. [being saved for a low
priority project]

I have an 8-port switch but no physical space for it.
I connect to the internet via a USB connected T-Mobile Hotspot.
WiFi is disabled as it is a possible security problem contributing
to unnecessary spectrum pollution.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 15 October 2018 10:45:54 Dan Purgert wrote:

> Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Monday 15 October 2018 05:09:05 David wrote:
> > [...]
> > And the best of both worlds is had buy investing in a good router,
> > useing to to Native Address Translation between the dhcp supplied
> > address your
>
> NAT = "Network Address Translation" ;)
>
> > ISP gives the router when it connects to the modem, to an address
> > range that is not forwarded to the internet except by explicit
> > instructions in the routers setup, assuming its been reflashed with
> > dd-wrt. Thats the
>
> No need for "reflashed with dd-wrt", that's exactly what a brand new
> "all-in-one gateway" from Linksys, etc. will do out of the box
> (granted, one may prefer to use *wrt for other reasons).
>
> > [...]
> >
> >> In the Debian installer you simply choose to use DHCP (if you have
> >> a ISP router modem that provides it) or specify some simple static
> >> network address values. The installer does the rest. Or you can do
> >> it yourself later, it's simple.
> >
> > And very insecure. The NAT and firewall in the router is the best
> > security you can put in a single common point between you and the
> > black hats. You don't need the hassle of local to local firewalls,
> > only between you and the black hats in the far east.
>
> Sure, running a box directly connected to the 'net with no firewall
> isn't the greatest idea -- but a few iptables rules, and your PC is
> doing exactly what you keep telling everyone to use dd-wrt for ;).

Then please explain that to Richard. I'm from near Missouri. :)

-- 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Dan Purgert]

Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Monday 15 October 2018 05:09:05 David wrote:
> [...]
> And the best of both worlds is had buy investing in a good router, useing 
> to to Native Address Translation between the dhcp supplied address your 

NAT = "Network Address Translation" ;)

> ISP gives the router when it connects to the modem, to an address range 
> that is not forwarded to the internet except by explicit instructions in 
> the routers setup, assuming its been reflashed with dd-wrt. Thats the 

No need for "reflashed with dd-wrt", that's exactly what a brand new
"all-in-one gateway" from Linksys, etc. will do out of the box (granted,
one may prefer to use *wrt for other reasons).

> [...]
>> In the Debian installer you simply choose to use DHCP (if you have a
>> ISP router modem that provides it) or specify some simple static
>> network address values. The installer does the rest. Or you can do it
>> yourself later, it's simple.
>
> And very insecure. The NAT and firewall in the router is the best 
> security you can put in a single common point between you and the black 
> hats. You don't need the hassle of local to local firewalls, only 
> between you and the black hats in the far east.

Sure, running a box directly connected to the 'net with no firewall
isn't the greatest idea -- but a few iptables rules, and your PC is
doing exactly what you keep telling everyone to use dd-wrt for ;).


-- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Gene Heskett]

On Monday 15 October 2018 05:09:05 David wrote:

> On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 23:01, Richard Owlett  
wrote:
> > I have no desire nor need for a traditional LAN.
>
As a somewhat senior to Richard, one thing I've learned in a lng 
carrear in electronics is that life is a lot simpler if you use the 
tools and parts designed to do the job at hand. So I don't understand 
the reticence to setup a local network on Richards part.  Its the tool 
to do the job and nothing else works as easy or fast.

> Wanting to transfer or share data between machines, while
> simultaneously declaring the above, appears inconsistent.
>
> I don't know what a "traditional LAN" is, so I wonder what you mean by
> those words, and what happened to create your attitude that you wish
> to avoid whatever it is.
>
> Networking was invented to optimise the requirement of transferring or
> sharing data
> between machines. Today, TCPIP is is simple to configure, in both
> software and hardware. The hardware is inexpensive. The configuration
> scales easily: connecting one PC to one other PC is pretty much the
> same as connecting one PC to the entire internet.

And the best of both worlds is had buy investing in a good router, useing 
to to Native Address Translation between the dhcp supplied address your 
ISP gives the router when it connects to the modem, to an address range 
that is not forwarded to the internet except by explicit instructions in 
the routers setup, assuming its been reflashed with dd-wrt. Thats the 
best kept secret to a secure system extant. So all my stuff, 6 or 7 
machines, have local addresses in the 192.168.xx.nn range, including 
this one.

That router faces an 8 port switch which by circuitous (house 
architecture) means connects to the rest of the machines alongside this 
one. By that means all machines have equal and transparent access to the 
internet to keep them updated.

I use ssh to log into all of them to operate them by remote control, and 
for file shuffling, they are all mounted to this machine and machine to 
machine with sshfs. I found both samba/cifs and nfs just troublesome 
enough I don't enable them if installed.  Don't need them.

With dd-wrt, I don't run firewalls, or if an installer sets one up and it 
gets in the way, it gets turned off, as dd-wrt handles all that in the 
router. In nearly 20 years, only one person has come thru that router 
and gained access to this machine, and I gave him the login's and pw's 
because I needed his help with a networking problem 15 years ago.

>
> I write this because I feel it's likely that that people's interest in
> assisting you
> here will wane if you appear to reject well-known, simple, widely used
> even by simpletons, best-practice for obscure reasons.
>
This is also true, Richard. The interconnection experts here, you will 
find all use the right tool for the job (for his/her definition of 
right, there are about as many of those as freckles on a red headed 
lady's face) ;-)

> In the Debian installer you simply choose to use DHCP (if you have a
> ISP router modem that provides it) or specify some simple static
> network address values. The installer does the rest. Or you can do it
> yourself later, it's simple.

And very insecure. The NAT and firewall in the router is the best 
security you can put in a single common point between you and the black 
hats. You don't need the hassle of local to local firewalls, only 
between you and the black hats in the far east.

> On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 00:33, Richard Owlett  
wrote:
> > Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?

Yes, I've done it via sshfs.
>
> When doing a new Debian install, the very first thing I do in the
> installer's expert mode is to configure it to use my local package
> cache on the machine next to it, and connect an ethernet cable between
> them. Bingo.
>
> > What should I be reading?
>
> man 5 interfaces, if you wish, or just answer the questions in the
> installer. And once you get that working ...
>
> 1) For package caching:
> approx or apt-cacher or apt-cacher-ng
>
> 2) For transferring data:
> rsync
> scp

Both of which work, but I generally use the sshfs mount for that since 
all the file manager tools like mc Just Work.

Dr. N. Klepp can guide you to passwordless access means using keyfiles 
that are much harder to hack than passwords.

> 3) To use the terminal on one machine to control another:
> ssh

Yes, read the man page.  It has many options.

> Debian is a modern miracle that I am grateful for every day. And there
> is a vast amount of expertise accessible on this mailing list.
> Typically the advice and assistance given here is an excellent guide
> to good practice, robust systems, and building useful, rewarding
> skills.

+10

And if I can manage it at 84 yo, Richards 3 score and ten should NOT be a 
barrier. USB was never intended for peer to peer connections, TCPIP 
(ethernet) was. Use the tool designed for the job. Security is all in 
the setup.

-- 

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/15/2018 04:09 AM, David wrote:

On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 23:01, Richard Owlett  wrote:


I have no desire nor need for a traditional LAN.


Wanting to transfer or share data between machines, while simultaneously
declaring the above, appears inconsistent.
[ *MASSIVE* snip]


Thank you for your post. You gave several references I need to read.
The key thought in the quoted sentence is a perceived inconsistency.
I've asked multiple questions that readers have assumed arose in a 
single context. They didn't. In fact, some of the contexts are mutually 
exclusive.


Given that threads once posted tend to have a life of their own, 
conflation should be expected
 [see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflation . Especially the 1st two 
paragraphs and the example of the "floating bride"].


I'll likely not have opportunity for a more complete response until 
tomorrow.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[David]

On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 23:01, Richard Owlett  wrote:
>
> I have no desire nor need for a traditional LAN.

Wanting to transfer or share data between machines, while simultaneously
declaring the above, appears inconsistent.

I don't know what a "traditional LAN" is, so I wonder what you mean by those
words, and what happened to create your attitude that you wish to avoid
whatever it is.

Networking was invented to optimise the requirement of transferring or
sharing data
between machines. Today, TCPIP is is simple to configure, in both software
and hardware. The hardware is inexpensive. The configuration scales easily:
connecting one PC to one other PC is pretty much the same as connecting
one PC to the entire internet.

I write this because I feel it's likely that that people's interest in
assisting you
here will wane if you appear to reject well-known, simple, widely used even
by simpletons, best-practice for obscure reasons.

In the Debian installer you simply choose to use DHCP (if you have a ISP
router modem that provides it) or specify some simple static network address
values. The installer does the rest. Or you can do it yourself later,
it's simple.

On Mon, 8 Oct 2018 at 00:33, Richard Owlett  wrote:
>
> Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?

When doing a new Debian install, the very first thing I do in the installer's
expert mode is to configure it to use my local package cache on the
machine next to it, and connect an ethernet cable between them. Bingo.

> What should I be reading?

man 5 interfaces, if you wish, or just answer the questions in the installer.
And once you get that working ...

1) For package caching:
approx or apt-cacher or apt-cacher-ng

2) For transferring data:
rsync
scp

3) To use the terminal on one machine to control another:
ssh

Debian is a modern miracle that I am grateful for every day. And there is
a vast amount of expertise accessible on this mailing list. Typically the
advice and assistance given here is an excellent guide to good practice,
robust systems, and building useful, rewarding skills.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/10/2018 08:01 AM, Alexandre Rossi wrote:

Hi,


Something just brought to mind apt-offline. The introductory paragraph
in the man page states:

apt-offline brings offline package management functionality to Debian
based system. It can be used to download packages and its dependencies
to be installed later on (or required to update) a disconnected machine.
Packages can be downloaded from a different connected machine.

Don't know how suitable it would be FOR ME. However studying its use may
prompt questions &/or answers I haven't thought about.



From looking at the source[1], apt-offline seems to be looking in the

local cache first before fetching files from the Web.

[1] 
https://github.com/rickysarraf/apt-offline/blob/master/apt_offline_core/AptOfflineCoreLib.py#L1231

Alex



I'm not a programmer. I had just recalled bits of the used docs I had 
read a couple of years ago.


I was guessing that when the transfer device was connected to system 
with internet connectivity, something similar to a cache was created on 
it to be read by the disconnected system.


I've not had a chance to research as my ISP had a failure and I've not 
had internet for several days.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/10/2018 02:53 AM, Curt wrote:

On 2018-10-09, Gene Heskett  wrote:


It's about time some invented a WiFi device which plugs into a USB
port.


Not needed, you can buy such a dongle from netgear for at least half a
decade or longer. I was out of ports on the 4 port in the shop, so I


I interpreted B's comment as pure snark of the variety inspired by
Richard's old-school and sometimes purely fictional and/or volitional
and/or self-imposed constraints. But maybe you're right, and the guy's
(B) been living in a closet for the last decade or so with the brooms
and the mops.



I think this all goes back to discovering a USB-USB device that would 
allow connecting two computers with the same 
topology/advantages/disadvantages as an "RS232C null modem". It did not 
work out-of-the-box in the manner *I* expected. The ramifications 
pointed to voids in my expertise. I pursued further as an *EDUCATIONAL* 
experience. As I (being past three score and ten) have said before "If 
retirement isn't for education, what use is it."


I have no desire nor need for a traditional LAN. Also shoe leather 
express with a flash drive has actual idiosyncratic advantages.

End of editorial 

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[songbird]

mick crane wrote:
>songbird wrote:
... 
>>   i used to take the USB stick to the library to download
>> big packages when needing updates.  glad i haven't had to
>> do that in a while, but i still have a relatively slow
>> connection (about 10M/minute) compared to many, but it's
>> much better than dialup.
>
> think I did that once to build Scribus, tracking down the dependencies 
> was a nightmare.

  i would generate a list of files via apt-get and
then take that with me so all i had to do was edit a
file and copy and past the paths to download each file.

  wasn't pleasant, but it did work.


  songbird

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Gene Heskett]

On Wednesday 10 October 2018 11:18:46 David Wright wrote:

> On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 10:52:10 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Wednesday 10 October 2018 09:58:22 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, October 09, 2018 04:01:49 PM Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 09 October 2018 12:20:25 Brian wrote:
> > > > > It's about time some invented a WiFi device which plugs into a
> > > > > USB port.
> > > >
> > > > Not needed,
>
> I think the remark was a sarcastic aside.
>
> > > And that reminds me that there are also somewhat similar devices
> > > that plug into a USB port and provide (in my case) 4 more USB
> > > ports and one RJ-45 Ethernet port.  I bought a couple of those on
> > > eBay (surely from the far east) for less than $10 each a few years
> > > ago.
> > >
> > > I use them to connect tablets without Ethernet ports to my LAN.
>
> The OP has indicated awareness of such devices and has eschewed them.
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/06/msg00418.html
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/06/msg00435.html
>
> I have no idea how to interpret "*DOES NOT* have a _physically_
> accesible Ethernet port" in
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/10/msg00302.html
>
> > Now I've got some little gismo from netgear that IIRC
> > cost a bit over 30 USD that plugs into the usb port adjacent to the
> > rj45. No longer in use as I had to turn that routers radio off for
> > lack of access security. A neighbor was using 2.5x my own net
> > bandwidth/month thru it. And they might not have realized they were.
> > I've no neighbors smart enough to know, or care. Probably a
> > smartphone, which will grab any signal it can get. Shrug.
>
> Do you mean that smartphones can crack WPA2 without its owner even
> being aware of the fact? (You've posted abut this incident several
> times.)
>
Maybe David, I could cancel that lease, and it was back by the time it 
could refresh the screen but I'll not lay my hand on the good book. That 
old router may not even have been aware of wpa2. Very little security if 
any. Old old netgear, made long before there was wifi in every neighbors 
house. Currently holding down a walmart plastic sack (from the inside) 
in the garage. Ought to have a 4 lb hammer massage before I toss it in 
the trash trailer for recycling.  Not enough memory to be reflashed with 
dd-wrt. Cannot turn the radio off, it comes back up with the next power 
bump. Worthless to me. Good only for someone a mile or more to the next 
farmhouse. This isn't that place although I can toss a clod of clay out 
of the city limits from my front yard. I think, my arm is getting tired, 
its 84 yo like the rest of me. :-[>
> Cheers,
> David.



-- 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[David Wright]

On Wed 10 Oct 2018 at 10:52:10 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 October 2018 09:58:22 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 09, 2018 04:01:49 PM Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 09 October 2018 12:20:25 Brian wrote:
> > > > It's about time some invented a WiFi device which plugs into a USB port.
> > >
> > > Not needed,

I think the remark was a sarcastic aside.

> > And that reminds me that there are also somewhat similar devices that
> > plug into a USB port and provide (in my case) 4 more USB ports and one
> > RJ-45 Ethernet port.  I bought a couple of those on eBay (surely from
> > the far east) for less than $10 each a few years ago.
> >
> > I use them to connect tablets without Ethernet ports to my LAN.

The OP has indicated awareness of such devices and has eschewed them.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/06/msg00418.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/06/msg00435.html

I have no idea how to interpret "*DOES NOT* have a _physically_
accesible Ethernet port" in

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/10/msg00302.html

> Now I've got some little gismo from netgear that IIRC 
> cost a bit over 30 USD that plugs into the usb port adjacent to the 
> rj45. No longer in use as I had to turn that routers radio off for lack 
> of access security. A neighbor was using 2.5x my own net bandwidth/month 
> thru it. And they might not have realized they were. I've no neighbors 
> smart enough to know, or care. Probably a smartphone, which will grab 
> any signal it can get. Shrug.

Do you mean that smartphones can crack WPA2 without its owner even
being aware of the fact? (You've posted abut this incident several times.)

Cheers,
David.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Gene Heskett]

On Wednesday 10 October 2018 09:58:22 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Tuesday, October 09, 2018 04:01:49 PM Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Tuesday 09 October 2018 12:20:25 Brian wrote:
> > > It's about time some invented a WiFi device which plugs into a USB
> > > port.
> >
> > Not needed, you can buy such a dongle from netgear for at least half
> > a decade or longer. I was out of ports on the 4 port in the shop, so
> > I bought one, moved an old router (running dd-wrt) out there and
> > turned its radio on, and rigged a teeny desk for my lappy so I could
> > ssh into the machines and write gcode in the comfort of a folding
> > chair, then exercise it while being able to see the machine move.
> > But I had to turn the radio off because it was also bridged to the
> > main router, and thence to the backbone.  One of my neighbors got by
> > the simple ssid, and used 80 gigs of my bandwidth one month so the
> > radio got turned off and I now have it hardwired when its out there.
> > So now the radios stay off unless one of my boys brings in a
> > smartphone and needs a connection.
>
> And that reminds me that there are also somewhat similar devices that
> plug into a USB port and provide (in my case) 4 more USB ports and one
> RJ-45 Ethernet port.  I bought a couple of those on eBay (surely from
> the far east) for less than $10 each a few years ago.
>
> I use them to connect tablets without Ethernet ports to my LAN.
>
> I suppose you could then plug the Ethernet into a WiFi adapter, but
> I've never tried that, and I'd begin to worry that some timing issue
> or similar might prevent it from working.

Thats something that one of the wifi gear makers (linksys?) has also had 
for 16 years or so. When I was playing visiting fireman at a tv station 
in the UP, (I'm a retired broadcast engineer) the motels internet was a 
router with a radio. My lappy's bcm4318 radio could not connect more 
than 15-30 seconds at a time. So the motel had little 3" square boxes 
you could ask for, plug it into the rj45 net port on my old lappy, and 
it just worked most of the time. The router needed a powerdown about 2x 
a day but mostly worked. I'd stopped this machines predecessor's suckage 
of email with fetchmail, so I could then get my email via t-bird from my 
motel room 950 miles away.  Eventually the outfit that had set the 
motel's internet up replaced the flaky router, and the last time I went 
up it just worked if I borrowed that little box.  The bcm4318 was on a 
PCMCIA card but I never found one to replace it as everybody seemed to 
think it was a $150 card. And would not let me test it in my machine. No 
sale, obviously. Now I've got some little gismo from netgear that IIRC 
cost a bit over 30 USD that plugs into the usb port adjacent to the 
rj45. No longer in use as I had to turn that routers radio off for lack 
of access security. A neighbor was using 2.5x my own net bandwidth/month 
thru it. And they might not have realized they were. I've no neighbors 
smart enough to know, or care. Probably a smartphone, which will grab 
any signal it can get. Shrug.

-- 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[rhkramer]

On Tuesday, October 09, 2018 04:01:49 PM Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 October 2018 12:20:25 Brian wrote:
> > It's about time some invented a WiFi device which plugs into a USB
> > port.
> 
> Not needed, you can buy such a dongle from netgear for at least half a
> decade or longer. I was out of ports on the 4 port in the shop, so I
> bought one, moved an old router (running dd-wrt) out there and turned
> its radio on, and rigged a teeny desk for my lappy so I could ssh into
> the machines and write gcode in the comfort of a folding chair, then
> exercise it while being able to see the machine move. But I had to turn
> the radio off because it was also bridged to the main router, and thence
> to the backbone.  One of my neighbors got by the simple ssid, and used
> 80 gigs of my bandwidth one month so the radio got turned off and I now
> have it hardwired when its out there. So now the radios stay off unless
> one of my boys brings in a smartphone and needs a connection.

And that reminds me that there are also somewhat similar devices that plug 
into a USB port and provide (in my case) 4 more USB ports and one RJ-45 
Ethernet port.  I bought a couple of those on eBay (surely from the far east) 
for less than $10 each a few years ago.

I use them to connect tablets without Ethernet ports to my LAN.

I suppose you could then plug the Ethernet into a WiFi adapter, but I've never 
tried that, and I'd begin to worry that some timing issue or similar might 
prevent it from working.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Alexandre Rossi]

Hi,

> Something just brought to mind apt-offline. The introductory paragraph
> in the man page states:
>
> apt-offline brings offline package management functionality to Debian
> based system. It can be used to download packages and its dependencies
> to be installed later on (or required to update) a disconnected machine.
> Packages can be downloaded from a different connected machine.
>
> Don't know how suitable it would be FOR ME. However studying its use may
> prompt questions &/or answers I haven't thought about.

>From looking at the source[1], apt-offline seems to be looking in the
local cache first before fetching files from the Web.

[1] 
https://github.com/rickysarraf/apt-offline/blob/master/apt_offline_core/AptOfflineCoreLib.py#L1231

Alex

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Tixy]

On Mon, 2018-10-08 at 10:20 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 06:59:15 (+0100), Tixy wrote:
> > On Sun, 2018-10-07 at 20:08 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> > [...]
> > > If you're impatient and want to copy files to the stick during
> > > installation, note that (last time I looked) cp has no -n switch
> > > at this time.
> > 
> > $ man cp | grep -C1 '\-n,'
> > 
> >    -n, --no-clobber
> >   do not overwrite an existing file (overrides a
> > previous -i option)
> 
> You're on the wrong man page. You need to read   man busybox.
> (I haven't checked how much of stretch's busybox is in d-i's busybox;
> perhaps all, perhaps not.)

Ahh, I wasn't paying enough attention to realise we were talking about
the installer.

You could get the same effect of "cp -n" with "yes n | cp -i".

-- 
Tixy

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Curt]

On 2018-10-09, Gene Heskett  wrote:
>>
>> It's about time some invented a WiFi device which plugs into a USB
>> port.
>
> Not needed, you can buy such a dongle from netgear for at least half a 
> decade or longer. I was out of ports on the 4 port in the shop, so I  

I interpreted B's comment as pure snark of the variety inspired by
Richard's old-school and sometimes purely fictional and/or volitional
and/or self-imposed constraints. But maybe you're right, and the guy's
(B) been living in a closet for the last decade or so with the brooms
and the mops.

-- 
"Now she understood that Anna could not have been in lilac, and that her charm
was just that she always stood out against her attire, that her dress could
never be noticeable on her." Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina 

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Gene Heskett]

On Tuesday 09 October 2018 15:59:02 Brian wrote:

> On Tue 09 Oct 2018 at 15:42:51 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Its probably been pointed out that usb was originally designed as a
> > client/server setup, and adding the stuff to make it peer to peer
> > has had rather spotty success. Wireless keyboards and mice are one
> > of the
>
> No, it hasn't been pointed out until you came along and threw it into
> the mix.
>
> > better success scenes. That could explain why its hardware fussy to
> > make it work. usb-3 is much better in that regard, but isn't yet 
> > universally available. Linux drivers for armhf/arm64 seem to have a
> > less than usb-3 spec speed.
> >
> > I have no x86 / amd64 machines with usb-3, so I can't testify for
> > those. Some discussion about newer hardware and usb-3 might be in
> > order and educational for the list, hint hint.
>
> Has this anything to do with what we are involved with, or is it just
> a way of passing the day?

A bit of both Brian. I wanted to make sure the context of Richards 
problem was given its due. Some stuff from Walmart works, and some 
won't. And its possible that exchanging the hardware in the middle might 
be fruitfull.

-- 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Gene Heskett]

On Tuesday 09 October 2018 12:20:25 Brian wrote:

> On Tue 09 Oct 2018 at 15:31:03 -, Dan Purgert wrote:
> > Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > On 10/09/2018 04:57 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
> > >> Richard Owlett wrote:
> > >>> On 10/08/2018 06:23 PM, David wrote:
> >  On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 06:25, Richard Owlett 
 wrote:
> > > I have no LAN.
> > >
> > > I've a low cap.
> > 
> >  Using the word "cap" suggests that you have an internet service
> >  provider.
> > >>>
> > >>> True
> > >>>
> >  How do you connect to that service provider?
> > >>>
> > >>> The same way as for decades via a "modem" (quotation marks
> > >>> significant). That was not how my ISP describes it. T-mobile
> > >>> sells it as a WiFi Hotspot which is served by the cell network
> > >>> [the WiFi is turned off]. When my former ISP discontinued
> > >>> dial-up service I chose not to use a connection that physically
> > >>> restricted me to a physical point of service.
> > >>
> > >> You have the capacity for a LAN - you'll just need to turn your
> > >> USB-tethered machine into a router.  Although, perhaps that is
> > >> work you don't want to bother doing.
> > >
> > > LAN generally requires Ethernet. My second most used machine does
> > > not have a physically available Ethernet port.
> >
> > Ethernet doesn't require cables though.  However the secondary bit
> > that you cannot (will not?) add WiFi to the secondary (tertiary?)
> > machines does throw a wrench into the works.
>
> It's about time some invented a WiFi device which plugs into a USB
> port.

Not needed, you can buy such a dongle from netgear for at least half a 
decade or longer. I was out of ports on the 4 port in the shop, so I  
bought one, moved an old router (running dd-wrt) out there and turned 
its radio on, and rigged a teeny desk for my lappy so I could ssh into 
the machines and write gcode in the comfort of a folding chair, then 
exercise it while being able to see the machine move. But I had to turn 
the radio off because it was also bridged to the main router, and thence 
to the backbone.  One of my neighbors got by the simple ssid, and used 
80 gigs of my bandwidth one month so the radio got turned off and I now 
have it hardwired when its out there. So now the radios stay off unless 
one of my boys brings in a smartphone and needs a connection.

-- 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Brian]

On Tue 09 Oct 2018 at 15:42:51 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:

> Its probably been pointed out that usb was originally designed as a 
> client/server setup, and adding the stuff to make it peer to peer has  
> had rather spotty success. Wireless keyboards and mice are one of the 

No, it hasn't been pointed out until you came along and threw it into
the mix.

> better success scenes. That could explain why its hardware fussy to make 
> it work. usb-3 is much better in that regard, but isn't yet  universally 
> available. Linux drivers for armhf/arm64 seem to have a less than usb-3 
> spec speed.
> 
> I have no x86 / amd64 machines with usb-3, so I can't testify for those. 
> Some discussion about newer hardware and usb-3 might be in order and 
> educational for the list, hint hint.

Has this anything to do with what we are involved with, or is it just a
way of passing the day?

-- 
Brian.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Gene Heskett]

On Tuesday 09 October 2018 10:53:30 Richard Owlett wrote:

> On 10/09/2018 04:57 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
> > Richard Owlett wrote:
> >> On 10/08/2018 06:23 PM, David wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 06:25, Richard Owlett  
wrote:
>  I have no LAN.
> 
>  I've a low cap.
> >>>
> >>> Using the word "cap" suggests that you have an internet service
> >>> provider.
> >>
> >> True
> >>
> >>> How do you connect to that service provider?
> >>
> >> The same way as for decades via a "modem" (quotation marks
> >> significant). That was not how my ISP describes it. T-mobile sells
> >> it as a WiFi Hotspot which is served by the cell network [the WiFi
> >> is turned off]. When my former ISP discontinued dial-up service I
> >> chose not to use a connection that physically restricted me to a
> >> physical point of service.
> >
> > You have the capacity for a LAN - you'll just need to turn your
> > USB-tethered machine into a router.  Although, perhaps that is work
> > you don't want to bother doing.
>
> LAN generally requires Ethernet. My second most used machine does not
> have a physically available Ethernet port.
>
> > The WiFi capabilities of the device would also allow you to have a
> > LAN. But if you have reasons for turning it off beyond "I don't need
> > no WiFi", then I suppose turning it on would be detrimental.
>
> The above mentioned second most used machine also has no WiFi. That's
> why I had once investigated a USB-USB connection.

Its probably been pointed out that usb was originally designed as a 
client/server setup, and adding the stuff to make it peer to peer has  
had rather spotty success. Wireless keyboards and mice are one of the 
better success scenes. That could explain why its hardware fussy to make 
it work. usb-3 is much better in that regard, but isn't yet  universally 
available. Linux drivers for armhf/arm64 seem to have a less than usb-3 
spec speed.

I have no x86 / amd64 machines with usb-3, so I can't testify for those. 
Some discussion about newer hardware and usb-3 might be in order and 
educational for the list, hint hint.

-- 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page 

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/09/2018 10:31 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:

Richard Owlett wrote:
[snip]

LAN generally requires Ethernet. My second most used machine does not
have a physically available Ethernet port.


Ethernet doesn't require cables though.


https://techterms.com/definition/ethernet :

Ethernet, pronounced "E-thernet" (with a long "e"), is the standard way
to connect computers on a network over a wired connection.



https://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia/term/42781/ethernet :

The standard network technology that connects computers to each other and to the Internet via cables. Defined 
as the 802.3 standard by the IEEE, the Ethernet access method is the global standard. Companies have hundreds 
and thousands of PCs wired together via Ethernet, and almost every reference to "local network," 
"LAN," and "network ready" is Ethernet. All new computers have it built in, and old 
machines can be retrofitted (see Ethernet adapter). See LAN.

Ethernet Is Wired - Wi-Fi Is Wireless
Wired Ethernet and wireless Wi-Fi exist together in virtually every home and 
office. Desktop computers may be wired, but phones and tablets need Wi-Fi, and 
a wireless router supports both. See Wi-Fi and wireless router.






 However the secondary bit that
you cannot (will not?) add WiFi to the secondary (tertiary?) machines
does throw a wrench into the works.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Brian]

On Tue 09 Oct 2018 at 15:31:03 -, Dan Purgert wrote:

> Richard Owlett wrote:
> > On 10/09/2018 04:57 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
> >> Richard Owlett wrote:
> >>> On 10/08/2018 06:23 PM, David wrote:
>  On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 06:25, Richard Owlett  wrote:
> >
> > I have no LAN.
> >
> > I've a low cap.
> 
>  Using the word "cap" suggests that you have an internet service provider.
> >>>
> >>> True
> 
>  How do you connect to that service provider?
> >>>
> >>> The same way as for decades via a "modem" (quotation marks significant).
> >>> That was not how my ISP describes it. T-mobile sells it as a WiFi
> >>> Hotspot which is served by the cell network [the WiFi is turned off].
> >>> When my former ISP discontinued dial-up service I chose not to use a
> >>> connection that physically restricted me to a physical point of service.
> >> 
> >> You have the capacity for a LAN - you'll just need to turn your
> >> USB-tethered machine into a router.  Although, perhaps that is work you
> >> don't want to bother doing.
> >
> > LAN generally requires Ethernet. My second most used machine does not 
> > have a physically available Ethernet port.
> 
> Ethernet doesn't require cables though.  However the secondary bit that
> you cannot (will not?) add WiFi to the secondary (tertiary?) machines
> does throw a wrench into the works.

It's about time some invented a WiFi device which plugs into a USB port.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Dan Purgert]

Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 10/09/2018 04:57 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
>> Richard Owlett wrote:
>>> On 10/08/2018 06:23 PM, David wrote:
 On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 06:25, Richard Owlett  wrote:
>
> I have no LAN.
>
> I've a low cap.

 Using the word "cap" suggests that you have an internet service provider.
>>>
>>> True

 How do you connect to that service provider?
>>>
>>> The same way as for decades via a "modem" (quotation marks significant).
>>> That was not how my ISP describes it. T-mobile sells it as a WiFi
>>> Hotspot which is served by the cell network [the WiFi is turned off].
>>> When my former ISP discontinued dial-up service I chose not to use a
>>> connection that physically restricted me to a physical point of service.
>> 
>> You have the capacity for a LAN - you'll just need to turn your
>> USB-tethered machine into a router.  Although, perhaps that is work you
>> don't want to bother doing.
>
> LAN generally requires Ethernet. My second most used machine does not 
> have a physically available Ethernet port.

Ethernet doesn't require cables though.  However the secondary bit that
you cannot (will not?) add WiFi to the secondary (tertiary?) machines
does throw a wrench into the works.


-- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/09/2018 04:57 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:

Richard Owlett wrote:

On 10/08/2018 06:23 PM, David wrote:

On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 06:25, Richard Owlett  wrote:


I have no LAN.

I've a low cap.


Using the word "cap" suggests that you have an internet service provider.


True


How do you connect to that service provider?


The same way as for decades via a "modem" (quotation marks significant).
That was not how my ISP describes it. T-mobile sells it as a WiFi
Hotspot which is served by the cell network [the WiFi is turned off].
When my former ISP discontinued dial-up service I chose not to use a
connection that physically restricted me to a physical point of service.


You have the capacity for a LAN - you'll just need to turn your
USB-tethered machine into a router.  Although, perhaps that is work you
don't want to bother doing.


LAN generally requires Ethernet. My second most used machine does not 
have a physically available Ethernet port.




The WiFi capabilities of the device would also allow you to have a LAN.
But if you have reasons for turning it off beyond "I don't need no
WiFi", then I suppose turning it on would be detrimental.


The above mentioned second most used machine also has no WiFi. That's 
why I had once investigated a USB-USB connection.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/08/2018 09:30 PM, Kenneth Parker wrote:
Hello Richard.  I honor the help you have given to other users on this 
List.  Good work!


On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 9:49 PM Richard Owlett > wrote:


On 10/08/2018 06:23 PM, David wrote:
 > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 06:25, Richard Owlett mailto:rowl...@cloud85.net>> wrote:
 >>
 >> I have no LAN.
 >>
 >> I've a low cap.
 >
 > Using the word "cap" suggests that you have an internet service
provider.

True
 >
 > How do you connect to that service provider?

The same way as for decades via a "modem" (quotation marks significant).
That was not how my ISP describes it. T-mobile sells it as a WiFi
Hotspot which is served by the cell network [the WiFi is turned off].


T-Mobile is the company I use for my Cell Service.  When my area of 
Carrboro, NC received spotty T-Mobile Reception, they "provided me", 
with no cost, a two-piece Gadget, to enhance Cell Service in my area.  
(Of course, my Broadband situation is different, as I have Spectrum 
(formerly Time Warner Cable).  I actually have a reasonable relationship 
with T-Mobile Support.


When I bought my first Hotspot (which died), T-Mobile was the only cell 
provider who would actually listen to my needs. The other !$^%!$^$%*I( 
wanted to shove a so-called "smart phone" down my throat. I find such 
*UNUSABLE* for web access due to vision problems. T-Mobile after sale 
support has been excellent.




Are you using a "Tether-like" scenario, called a "Mobile Hotspot" for 
your Internet access?  (I do this when I travel).


Yes.



When my former ISP discontinued dial-up service I chose not to use a
connection that physically restricted me to a physical point of service.
 >
 > What is the make and model of the equipment that provides the
connection
 > to that service provider?

The manufacturer is Alcatel. No model number is visible.


Wow!  Not even fine print?


Not on the device. The carton is long gone.




 >
 > How do you connect your computer to that equipment?

USB port.


Actual Tethering?

 >
 > How many ethernet ports, if any, does that equipment have?

None.

Wow!


A typical LAN requires Ethernet. The machine that would be central to 
any possible LAN usage *DOES NOT* have a _physically_ accesible Ethernet 
port - which was what prompted me to once investigate USB-USB communication.




Anyway, I feel your pain, as one who has tried to access Networks in 
rural areas.


If you define rural as where chickens, hogs, OR cattle within an hour's 
drive outnumber humans, them I'm rural.
But local C of C would prefer mention that I'm the 3rd largest city in 
Missouri. I did not want the physical constraints of cable or satellite.





How is your Home Phone Service?


Technically adequate.



Thank you and best regards,

Kenneth Parker

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Dan Purgert]

Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 10/08/2018 06:23 PM, David wrote:
>> On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 06:25, Richard Owlett  wrote:
>>>
>>> I have no LAN.
>>>
>>> I've a low cap.
>> 
>> Using the word "cap" suggests that you have an internet service provider.
>
> True
>> 
>> How do you connect to that service provider?
>
> The same way as for decades via a "modem" (quotation marks significant).
> That was not how my ISP describes it. T-mobile sells it as a WiFi 
> Hotspot which is served by the cell network [the WiFi is turned off]. 
> When my former ISP discontinued dial-up service I chose not to use a 
> connection that physically restricted me to a physical point of service.

You have the capacity for a LAN - you'll just need to turn your
USB-tethered machine into a router.  Although, perhaps that is work you
don't want to bother doing. 

The WiFi capabilities of the device would also allow you to have a LAN.
But if you have reasons for turning it off beyond "I don't need no
WiFi", then I suppose turning it on would be detrimental.



-- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Brian]

On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 21:39:49 +0100, Brian wrote:

> On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 15:32:52 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
> > On 10/08/2018 02:46 PM, Brian wrote:
> > > On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 14:24:49 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On 10/08/2018 10:56 AM, David Wright wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > That may well be, but the sooner you deploy some method of reusing
> > > > > packages, the more you avoid exceeding your cap.
> > > > 
> > > > I've a low cap. But I use even less and have built up a cushion.
> > > > If I have enough built up, I'll correct my BUSTER problems now. 
> > > > Otherwise I
> > > > can wait for the actual release and spend my time studying how to use a
> > > > cache.
> > > 
> > > You'll be waiting a long time. So will everyone else. Hope your studies
> > > bear fruit.
> > > 
> > 
> > So what's so bad about March? !
> > I can state with no fear of contradiction that "...I can wait for the actual
> > release...". In fact my usual practice is wait for ~month after a formal
> > release before purchasing a DVD set.
> 
> March? Link please. To save my looking it up.

A transition freeze of Debian 10 is planned on January 12, 2019, with
Buster’s soft-freeze scheduled for February 12. No fixed release date
but some time mid-2019 is a likihood.

You'll be a cache manipulation expert by then. :)

-- 
Brian.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Kenneth Parker]

Hello Richard.  I honor the help you have given to other users on this
List.  Good work!

On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 9:49 PM Richard Owlett  wrote:

> On 10/08/2018 06:23 PM, David wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 06:25, Richard Owlett  wrote:
> >>
> >> I have no LAN.
> >>
> >> I've a low cap.
> >
> > Using the word "cap" suggests that you have an internet service provider.
>
> True
> >
> > How do you connect to that service provider?
>
> The same way as for decades via a "modem" (quotation marks significant).
> That was not how my ISP describes it. T-mobile sells it as a WiFi
> Hotspot which is served by the cell network [the WiFi is turned off].
>

T-Mobile is the company I use for my Cell Service.  When my area of
Carrboro, NC received spotty T-Mobile Reception, they "provided me", with
no cost, a two-piece Gadget, to enhance Cell Service in my area.  (Of
course, my Broadband situation is different, as I have Spectrum (formerly
Time Warner Cable).  I actually have a reasonable relationship with
T-Mobile Support.

Are you using a "Tether-like" scenario, called a "Mobile Hotspot" for your
Internet access?  (I do this when I travel).


> When my former ISP discontinued dial-up service I chose not to use a
> connection that physically restricted me to a physical point of service.
> >
> > What is the make and model of the equipment that provides the connection
> > to that service provider?
>
> The manufacturer is Alcatel. No model number is visible.
>

Wow!  Not even fine print?

> >
> > How do you connect your computer to that equipment?
>
> USB port.
>

Actual Tethering?

> >
> > How many ethernet ports, if any, does that equipment have?
>
> None.
>
> Wow!

Anyway, I feel your pain, as one who has tried to access Networks in rural
areas.

How is your Home Phone Service?

Thank you and best regards,

Kenneth Parker

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/08/2018 06:23 PM, David wrote:

On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 06:25, Richard Owlett  wrote:


I have no LAN.

I've a low cap.


Using the word "cap" suggests that you have an internet service provider.


True


How do you connect to that service provider?


The same way as for decades via a "modem" (quotation marks significant).
That was not how my ISP describes it. T-mobile sells it as a WiFi 
Hotspot which is served by the cell network [the WiFi is turned off]. 
When my former ISP discontinued dial-up service I chose not to use a 
connection that physically restricted me to a physical point of service.


What is the make and model of the equipment that provides the connection
to that service provider?


The manufacturer is Alcatel. No model number is visible.


How do you connect your computer to that equipment?


USB port.


How many ethernet ports, if any, does that equipment have?


None.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[David]

On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 06:25, Richard Owlett  wrote:
>
> I have no LAN.
>
> I've a low cap.

Using the word "cap" suggests that you have an internet service provider.

How do you connect to that service provider?

What is the make and model of the equipment that provides the connection
to that service provider?

How do you connect your computer to that equipment?

How many ethernet ports, if any, does that equipment have?

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Brian]

On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 15:32:52 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:

> On 10/08/2018 02:46 PM, Brian wrote:
> > On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 14:24:49 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> > 
> > > On 10/08/2018 10:56 AM, David Wright wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > That may well be, but the sooner you deploy some method of reusing
> > > > packages, the more you avoid exceeding your cap.
> > > 
> > > I've a low cap. But I use even less and have built up a cushion.
> > > If I have enough built up, I'll correct my BUSTER problems now. Otherwise 
> > > I
> > > can wait for the actual release and spend my time studying how to use a
> > > cache.
> > 
> > You'll be waiting a long time. So will everyone else. Hope your studies
> > bear fruit.
> > 
> 
> So what's so bad about March? !
> I can state with no fear of contradiction that "...I can wait for the actual
> release...". In fact my usual practice is wait for ~month after a formal
> release before purchasing a DVD set.

March? Link please. To save my looking it up.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/08/2018 02:46 PM, Brian wrote:

On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 14:24:49 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:


On 10/08/2018 10:56 AM, David Wright wrote:


That may well be, but the sooner you deploy some method of reusing
packages, the more you avoid exceeding your cap.


I've a low cap. But I use even less and have built up a cushion.
If I have enough built up, I'll correct my BUSTER problems now. Otherwise I
can wait for the actual release and spend my time studying how to use a
cache.


You'll be waiting a long time. So will everyone else. Hope your studies
bear fruit.



So what's so bad about March? !
I can state with no fear of contradiction that "...I can wait for the 
actual release...". In fact my usual practice is wait for ~month after a 
formal release before purchasing a DVD set.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Brian]

On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 14:24:49 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:

> On 10/08/2018 10:56 AM, David Wright wrote:
> > 
> > That may well be, but the sooner you deploy some method of reusing
> > packages, the more you avoid exceeding your cap.
> 
> I've a low cap. But I use even less and have built up a cushion.
> If I have enough built up, I'll correct my BUSTER problems now. Otherwise I
> can wait for the actual release and spend my time studying how to use a
> cache.

You'll be waiting a long time. So will everyone else. Hope your studies
bear fruit.

-- 
Brian..

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Brian]

On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 14:24:49 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:

> On 10/08/2018 10:56 AM, David Wright wrote:
> > On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 06:35:19 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > > > I was under the impression that your networking consisted of
> > > > point-to-point links via machines' USB ports.
> > > 
> > > That effort is on hold [almost abandoned]. It's goal was primarily
> > > educational not something for routine use.
> > 
> > Fair enough. You still don't say whether you're running a conventional
> > LAN nowadays.
> 
> I have no LAN.

Nice to know. This makes solutions which many users have proposed for
your many problems totally unworkable.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/08/2018 10:56 AM, David Wright wrote:

On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 06:35:19 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:

[snip]

I was under the impression that your networking consisted of
point-to-point links via machines' USB ports.


That effort is on hold [almost abandoned]. It's goal was primarily
educational not something for routine use.


Fair enough. You still don't say whether you're running a conventional
LAN nowadays.


I have no LAN.




Can you simultaneously
connect the machine being installed to both the internet and the
system running apt-cache-ng (and using http:)?


I haven't yet read the documentation for apt-cache-ng and don't know
if it would match my mental image.


You might think of a triangle with router and two computers at the
vertices. Each device needs an internet connection to the others
simultaneously during installation for apt-cache-ng to work.
(Typically the two computers will communicate through the router
rather than directly, but you don't have to think about that because
routers just know how to do it.)



OK that won't work as I have no LAN.


I was assuming that that all the
packages that I downloaded/upgraded were still in a cache which could
be transferred to the target machine via a flash drive. The machines
are adjacent.


Yes, that's the simpler method that I outlined in my first post.
That's the one that mentions /target, which is a fact that needs to
be discovered and isn't well documented, hence my post.
(Most people installing Debian will never need to be made aware of
the existence of /target.)


OK




My current priority is verifying my Buster system is
properly setup.


That may well be, but the sooner you deploy some method of reusing
packages, the more you avoid exceeding your cap.


I've a low cap. But I use even less and have built up a cushion.
If I have enough built up, I'll correct my BUSTER problems now. 
Otherwise I can wait for the actual release and spend my time studying 
how to use a cache.


Something just brought to mind apt-offline. The introductory paragraph 
in the man page states:

apt-offline brings offline package management functionality to Debian > based 
system. It can be used to download packages and its dependencies
to be installed later on (or required to update) a disconnected machine.
Packages can be downloaded from a different connected machine. 


Don't know how suitable it would be FOR ME. However studying its use may 
prompt questions &/or answers I haven't thought about.




That's why the
simplest method may be the best to start with. I'd been using it
(originally with Iomega Zip and Jaz drives) a decade before I had
any sort of Internet service at home, and before apt-cache-ng was
released (3 months later).

Cheers,
David.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Brian]

On Sun 07 Oct 2018 at 15:29:43 +0100, Brian wrote:

> On Sun 07 Oct 2018 at 08:32:42 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > What should I be reading?
> 
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/06/msg00510.html

Moving on from this helpful answer, the snipped bit is restored below:

 > All my machines have use Stretch DVD1 for installation.
 > I have a low monthly data cap - currently at my limit.
 > One machine has an apt-get update and upgrade with the addition of some
 > packages not on DVD1.
 > I've not intentionally deleted any cached files. 
 >

Please would you give an estimate of the number of packages not on DVD1.
Or the exact number, if you prefer.

-- 
Brian.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[David Wright]

On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 06:35:19 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 10/07/2018 08:25 PM, David Wright wrote:
> > On Sun 07 Oct 2018 at 09:01:43 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > On 10/07/2018 08:45 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
> > > > Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > > > [...]
> > > > > Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
> > > > > What should I be reading?
> > > > > TIA
> > > > 
> > > > I think so, but it may be more manual than you'd otherwise do.
> > > 
> > > NOT a problem.
> > > I've lots of time. Data cap is the constraint. My routine since
> > > Squeeze had been install from complete DVD sets - was on 56k dial-up
> > > at the time and the habit stuck.
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Perhaps you should look into apt-cache-ng (IIRC) or squid to facilitate
> > > > automatic caching.
> > > 
> > > That would handle future problems. I'll read up on them to see if it
> > > gives hints for current situation.
> > 
> > To use apt-cache-ng, you need a running system accessible over the
> > network that you're installing through.
> > 
> > I was under the impression that your networking consisted of
> > point-to-point links via machines' USB ports.
> 
> That effort is on hold [almost abandoned]. It's goal was primarily
> educational not something for routine use.

Fair enough. You still don't say whether you're running a conventional
LAN nowadays.

> > Can you simultaneously
> > connect the machine being installed to both the internet and the
> > system running apt-cache-ng (and using http:)?
> 
> I haven't yet read the documentation for apt-cache-ng and don't know
> if it would match my mental image.

You might think of a triangle with router and two computers at the
vertices. Each device needs an internet connection to the others
simultaneously during installation for apt-cache-ng to work.
(Typically the two computers will communicate through the router
rather than directly, but you don't have to think about that because
routers just know how to do it.)

> I was assuming that that all the
> packages that I downloaded/upgraded were still in a cache which could
> be transferred to the target machine via a flash drive. The machines
> are adjacent.

Yes, that's the simpler method that I outlined in my first post.
That's the one that mentions /target, which is a fact that needs to
be discovered and isn't well documented, hence my post.
(Most people installing Debian will never need to be made aware of
the existence of /target.)

> My current priority is verifying my Buster system is
> properly setup.

That may well be, but the sooner you deploy some method of reusing
packages, the more you avoid exceeding your cap. That's why the
simplest method may be the best to start with. I'd been using it
(originally with Iomega Zip and Jaz drives) a decade before I had
any sort of Internet service at home, and before apt-cache-ng was
released (3 months later).

Cheers,
David.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[David Wright]

On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 06:59:15 (+0100), Tixy wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-10-07 at 20:08 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> [...]
> > If you're impatient and want to copy files to the stick during
> > installation, note that (last time I looked) cp has no -n switch
> > at this time.
> 
> $ man cp | grep -C1 '\-n,'
> 
>    -n, --no-clobber
>   do not overwrite an existing file (overrides a previous -i 
> option)

You're on the wrong man page. You need to read   man busybox.
(I haven't checked how much of stretch's busybox is in d-i's busybox;
perhaps all, perhaps not.)

I would expect people to figure out the workaround of using a fresh
stick and consolidating (if required) later. Perhaps; perhaps not.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[David Wright]

On Mon 08 Oct 2018 at 08:06:56 (+), Curt wrote:
> On 2018-10-07, Richard Owlett  wrote:
> > All my machines have use Stretch DVD1 for installation.
> > I have a low monthly data cap - currently at my limit.
> > One machine has an apt-get update and upgrade with the addition of some 
> > packages not on DVD1.
> > I've not intentionally deleted any cached files.
> > Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
> > What should I be reading?
> > TIA
> 
> I gave a perfunctory gander at the following page.
> 
> https://www.pcsuggest.com/reuse-deb-files-to-install-software-in-many-offline-machine/
> 
> I found the "echo 'Acquire::Languages "none";' > 
> /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/99no-translation" 
> tip of particular interest (actually that's not how he does it but the result 
> is the same).
> 
> This apparently avoids the downloading of the supernumerary Translation
> files which only those living on the Babel Tower really have a pressing
> need for.
> 
> I'm reading that you won't have long descriptions (with apt-cache?) with this
> parameter toggled on.
> 
> man apt.conf Languages section for details (which I'm too stupid to
> really grasp entirely but whatever).

On this 1843-package stretch the statistics are:
 45MB /var/lib/apt/lists/*Packag*
 31MB /var/lib/apt/lists/*Translat*
 40MB /var/lib/apt/lists/*Sourc*
 67MB /var/lib/apt/lists/*Contents* (for apt-file I believe)
182MB total

OTOH freshly installed 1819-package (no DE) system gives:
$ du -sh /var/cache/apt/archives/
du: cannot read directory '/var/cache/apt/archives/partial': Permission denied
2.9G/var/cache/apt/archives/

This laptop runs a mature¹ apt-cacher-ng for wheezy/jessie/stretch
systems with the default expiration parameters and gives:
$ du -sh /var/cache/apt-cacher-ng/
13G /var/cache/apt-cacher-ng/

I would call that a pretty marginal saving. I've never bothered to
play with lists the same way as I did with packages. And really, the
hint is in the file locations: mess with /var/cache/ all you like,
but don't mess with /var/lib/. If you screw /var/cache/, it's
legitimate to delete it. You *can* clear specifically
/var/lib/apt/lists/ (leave partial/ and lock) but that's not the
same as juggling them.

Under "KNOW THE RISK", it spells out the self-imposed problem with
the method outlined below. dpkg -i *deb   is a stupid thing to do
under the circumstances. Far better to stuff the cache with debs
and leave the apt family do their job.

¹ Looks like I started it running in May 2014 by importing at least
1500 packages without preserving their timestamps. The entirety has
been reimported twice since, from wheezy via jessie to stretch.

Cheers,
David.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Dan Purgert]

Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 10/08/2018 06:56 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
>> [...]
>> Admittedly, these options work best if you have multiple machines
>> that're pretty much the same (e.g. that "lab" I did, where all the
>> desktops were identical).
>> 
>
> They are not physically identical but all are Stretch and the majority 
> were installed from the same Debian 9.1.0 DVD.

The proxies would at least simplify core OS stuff (i.e. whatever's
shared amongst all the machines, such as kernel patches), but if you
have a dozen machines each doing a dozen different things (e.g. one's
running bind, another's running apache, yet another's running postfix,
etc.) then each of those servers would tend to always have "cache
misses" when you're updating the server-specific stuff.


-- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Dan Ritter]

On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 06:35:19AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
> I haven't yet read the documentation for apt-cache-ng and don't know if it
> would match my mental image. I was assuming that that all the packages that
> I downloaded/upgraded were still in a cache which could be transferred to
> the target machine via a flash drive. The machines are adjacent. My current
> priority is verifying my Buster system is properly setup.

The packages are very likely to be sitting in
/var/cache/apt/archives

-dsr-

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/08/2018 06:56 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:

Richard Owlett wrote:

On 10/07/2018 08:25 PM, David Wright wrote:

[...]
Can you simultaneously
connect the machine being installed to both the internet and the
system running apt-cache-ng (and using http:)?


I haven't yet read the documentation for apt-cache-ng and don't know if
it would match my mental image. I was assuming that that all the
packages that I downloaded/upgraded were still in a cache which could be
transferred to the target machine via a flash drive. The machines are
adjacent. My current priority is verifying my Buster system is properly
setup.


Essentially apt-cache-ng (or squid) is a proxy service for your
machines.

You run it on your "main" machine (or, well any spare server or VM), and
tell apt to use that machine as a proxy.

Then, when you're on your secondary laptop (or updating additional
servers / VMs), they send all their apt requests via the proxy.  If it
has the package(s) in question, it supplies them directly to the client
machine(s).  If it doesn't, then you download them (and the proxy cache
is updated for next time).

Admittedly, these options work best if you have multiple machines
that're pretty much the same (e.g. that "lab" I did, where all the
desktops were identical).



They are not physically identical but all are Stretch and the majority 
were installed from the same Debian 9.1.0 DVD.


I'm getting motivated to investigating using a VM.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Dan Purgert]

Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 10/07/2018 08:25 PM, David Wright wrote:
>> [...]
>> Can you simultaneously
>> connect the machine being installed to both the internet and the
>> system running apt-cache-ng (and using http:)?
>
> I haven't yet read the documentation for apt-cache-ng and don't know if 
> it would match my mental image. I was assuming that that all the 
> packages that I downloaded/upgraded were still in a cache which could be 
> transferred to the target machine via a flash drive. The machines are 
> adjacent. My current priority is verifying my Buster system is properly 
> setup.

Essentially apt-cache-ng (or squid) is a proxy service for your
machines.  

You run it on your "main" machine (or, well any spare server or VM), and
tell apt to use that machine as a proxy.

Then, when you're on your secondary laptop (or updating additional
servers / VMs), they send all their apt requests via the proxy.  If it
has the package(s) in question, it supplies them directly to the client
machine(s).  If it doesn't, then you download them (and the proxy cache
is updated for next time).

Admittedly, these options work best if you have multiple machines
that're pretty much the same (e.g. that "lab" I did, where all the
desktops were identical).

>
>
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> David.
>> 
>> 
>> 


-- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[mick crane]

On 2018-10-08 12:06, songbird wrote:

mick crane wrote:

On 2018-10-07 20:04, songbird wrote:


  i used to run on dialup and hated how long it took
for some things to download.  the package debdelta
did help some at that time, but i have no idea if the
service is even still there let alone functional.


I installed Gentoo once over dialup
It took two weeks.


  i used to take the USB stick to the library to download
big packages when needing updates.  glad i haven't had to
do that in a while, but i still have a relatively slow
connection (about 10M/minute) compared to many, but it's
much better than dialup.


think I did that once to build Scribus, tracking down the dependencies 
was a nightmare.


mick



--
Key ID4BFEBB31

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/07/2018 08:08 PM, David Wright wrote:

On Sun 07 Oct 2018 at 08:32:42 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:

All my machines have use Stretch DVD1 for installation.
I have a low monthly data cap - currently at my limit.
One machine has an apt-get update and upgrade with the addition of
some packages not on DVD1.
I've not intentionally deleted any cached files.
Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?


Yes, every different .deb file has a unique name so you can copy them
wholesale onto a stick and use them over and over, and add more to
your collection at any time.


What should I be reading?


Copying them from archives/ to a stick really needs no documentation
beyond avoiding overwriting previous copies with -n, not because it
would cause a problem but just that it wastes time.
If you're impatient and want to copy files to the stick during
installation, note that (last time I looked) cp has no -n switch
at this time.

If you want to minimise traffic to the max, then you can copy the
files from the stick to the installation as soon as the directory
becomes available. IIRC that's at the point you are about to select
"Install the base system". So a sequence of commands on VC2 would be:

# cd /target/var/cache/apt/archives/

if that fails, than just go one more step on VC1 and try again.

# mount -t auto /dev/sdz9 /mnt

where z9 is whatever is appropriate.

# cp -ip /mnt/whatever/*deb /target/var/cache/apt/archives/

assuming the files on the stick are all are in directory "whatever".
(Why bother? Because you'll run out of top-level entries if the
stick is VFAT and you write all the files at top level.)

# umount /mnt



That description is consistent with my mental image.
The driving motivation is educational. To satisfy my real-world needs I 
can wait for full release and install from a DVD set.



Cheers,
David.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/07/2018 08:25 PM, David Wright wrote:

On Sun 07 Oct 2018 at 09:01:43 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:

On 10/07/2018 08:45 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:

Richard Owlett wrote:

[...]
Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
What should I be reading?
TIA


I think so, but it may be more manual than you'd otherwise do.


NOT a problem.
I've lots of time. Data cap is the constraint. My routine since
Squeeze had been install from complete DVD sets - was on 56k dial-up
at the time and the habit stuck.



Perhaps you should look into apt-cache-ng (IIRC) or squid to facilitate
automatic caching.


That would handle future problems. I'll read up on them to see if it
gives hints for current situation.


To use apt-cache-ng, you need a running system accessible over the
network that you're installing through.

I was under the impression that your networking consisted of
point-to-point links via machines' USB ports.


That effort is on hold [almost abandoned]. It's goal was primarily 
educational not something for routine use.



Can you simultaneously
connect the machine being installed to both the internet and the
system running apt-cache-ng (and using http:)?


I haven't yet read the documentation for apt-cache-ng and don't know if 
it would match my mental image. I was assuming that that all the 
packages that I downloaded/upgraded were still in a cache which could be 
transferred to the target machine via a flash drive. The machines are 
adjacent. My current priority is verifying my Buster system is properly 
setup.





Cheers,
David.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[songbird]

mick crane wrote:
> On 2018-10-07 20:04, songbird wrote:
>
>>   i used to run on dialup and hated how long it took
>> for some things to download.  the package debdelta
>> did help some at that time, but i have no idea if the
>> service is even still there let alone functional.
>
> I installed Gentoo once over dialup
> It took two weeks.

  i used to take the USB stick to the library to download
big packages when needing updates.  glad i haven't had to
do that in a while, but i still have a relatively slow
connection (about 10M/minute) compared to many, but it's
much better than dialup.


  songbird

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[mick crane]

On 2018-10-07 20:04, songbird wrote:


  i used to run on dialup and hated how long it took
for some things to download.  the package debdelta
did help some at that time, but i have no idea if the
service is even still there let alone functional.


I installed Gentoo once over dialup
It took two weeks.

mick

--
Key ID4BFEBB31

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Curt]

On 2018-10-07, Richard Owlett  wrote:
> All my machines have use Stretch DVD1 for installation.
> I have a low monthly data cap - currently at my limit.
> One machine has an apt-get update and upgrade with the addition of some 
> packages not on DVD1.
> I've not intentionally deleted any cached files.
> Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
> What should I be reading?
> TIA

I gave a perfunctory gander at the following page.

https://www.pcsuggest.com/reuse-deb-files-to-install-software-in-many-offline-machine/

I found the "echo 'Acquire::Languages "none";' > 
/etc/apt/apt.conf.d/99no-translation" 
tip of particular interest (actually that's not how he does it but the result 
is the same).

This apparently avoids the downloading of the supernumerary Translation
files which only those living on the Babel Tower really have a pressing
need for.

I'm reading that you won't have long descriptions (with apt-cache?) with this
parameter toggled on.

man apt.conf Languages section for details (which I'm too stupid to
really grasp entirely but whatever).

-- 
"Now she understood that Anna could not have been in lilac, and that her charm
was just that she always stood out against her attire, that her dress could
never be noticeable on her." Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina 

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Tixy]

On Sun, 2018-10-07 at 20:08 -0500, David Wright wrote:
[...]
> If you're impatient and want to copy files to the stick during
> installation, note that (last time I looked) cp has no -n switch
> at this time.

$ man cp | grep -C1 '\-n,'

   -n, --no-clobber
  do not overwrite an existing file (overrides a previous -i option)

-- 
Tixy

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[David Christensen]

On 10/7/18 6:32 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:

All my machines have use Stretch DVD1 for installation.
I have a low monthly data cap - currently at my limit.
One machine has an apt-get update and upgrade with the addition of some 
packages not on DVD1.

I've not intentionally deleted any cached files.
Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
What should I be reading?


I use approx(8):

1.  Install approx on whichever machine you want to be the apt(8) proxy 
for your LAN.  See the first half of:


http://cheatsheet.logicalwebhost.com/approx-howto/

2.  rsync(1) all the Debian packages in the apt cache directory 
(/var/cache/apt/archives) from all your machines to the same directory 
on the proxy.


3.  Run approx-import(8) on the proxy to populate the approx cache.

4.  On the proxy, configure apt to use the proxy, run 'apt-get update', 
and run 'apt-get upgrade'.  See the second half of the above URL.


5.  Repeat step (4) for all your other machines.


David

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[David Wright]

On Sun 07 Oct 2018 at 09:01:43 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 10/07/2018 08:45 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:
> > Richard Owlett wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
> > > What should I be reading?
> > > TIA
> > 
> > I think so, but it may be more manual than you'd otherwise do.
> 
> NOT a problem.
> I've lots of time. Data cap is the constraint. My routine since
> Squeeze had been install from complete DVD sets - was on 56k dial-up
> at the time and the habit stuck.
> 
> > 
> > Perhaps you should look into apt-cache-ng (IIRC) or squid to facilitate
> > automatic caching.
> 
> That would handle future problems. I'll read up on them to see if it
> gives hints for current situation.

To use apt-cache-ng, you need a running system accessible over the
network that you're installing through.

I was under the impression that your networking consisted of
point-to-point links via machines' USB ports. Can you simultaneously
connect the machine being installed to both the internet and the
system running apt-cache-ng (and using http:)?

Cheers,
David.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[David Wright]

On Sun 07 Oct 2018 at 08:32:42 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> All my machines have use Stretch DVD1 for installation.
> I have a low monthly data cap - currently at my limit.
> One machine has an apt-get update and upgrade with the addition of
> some packages not on DVD1.
> I've not intentionally deleted any cached files.
> Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?

Yes, every different .deb file has a unique name so you can copy them
wholesale onto a stick and use them over and over, and add more to
your collection at any time.

> What should I be reading?

Copying them from archives/ to a stick really needs no documentation
beyond avoiding overwriting previous copies with -n, not because it
would cause a problem but just that it wastes time.
If you're impatient and want to copy files to the stick during
installation, note that (last time I looked) cp has no -n switch
at this time.

If you want to minimise traffic to the max, then you can copy the
files from the stick to the installation as soon as the directory
becomes available. IIRC that's at the point you are about to select
"Install the base system". So a sequence of commands on VC2 would be:

# cd /target/var/cache/apt/archives/

if that fails, than just go one more step on VC1 and try again.

# mount -t auto /dev/sdz9 /mnt

where z9 is whatever is appropriate.

# cp -ip /mnt/whatever/*deb /target/var/cache/apt/archives/

assuming the files on the stick are all are in directory "whatever".
(Why bother? Because you'll run out of top-level entries if the
stick is VFAT and you write all the files at top level.)

# umount /mnt

Cheers,
David.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[songbird]

Richard Owlett wrote:

> All my machines have use Stretch DVD1 for installation.
> I have a low monthly data cap - currently at my limit.
> One machine has an apt-get update and upgrade with the addition of some 
> packages not on DVD1.
> I've not intentionally deleted any cached files.
> Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
> What should I be reading?
> TIA

  i keep it simple.

  anytime i download a package which ends up in
/var/cache/apt/archives i make a copy of it to
an external device.  from then on any time i need
it i can copy it back without having to redownload
it.

  i also make sure that my configuration for apt
includes the flag for keeping things and not 
getting rid of them unless i explicitly request it.

  i set this right after the base system install.

APT::Clean-Installed "false";

  once i have the system installed and any downloaded
packages backed up to the external device then i
manually run the following once in a while (after
copying any new ones to my backup).

# apt-get autoclean

  i used to run on dialup and hated how long it took
for some things to download.  the package debdelta 
did help some at that time, but i have no idea if the 
service is even still there let alone functional.


  songbird

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Cindy-Sue Causey]

On 10/7/18, Richard Owlett  wrote:
> All my machines have use Stretch DVD1 for installation.
> I have a low monthly data cap - currently at my limit.
> One machine has an apt-get update and upgrade with the addition of some
> packages not on DVD1.
> I've not intentionally deleted any cached files.
> Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
> What should I be reading?
> TIA


I don't know if I'm understanding the question correctly. It sounds
like one possibility is like where *I* bind my massive ~20GB+ hoard of
dotDebs to my /var/cache/apt/archives. As much as I debootstrap over
and over, that works fabulously *for me* on dialup.

My method is:

mount -B /path/to/archive/hoard /var/cache/apt/archives

The hoards are housed as child directories on various partitions on
miscellaneous hard drives.

I used to employ symlink instead of bind ("-B" or "--bind"). The
symlink route *appeared* to work then one day I figured out that route
was the culprit in the "I HAVE NO NAME!" identity crisis that my root
user was yelling about after chroot'ing into debootstraps. I've never
stopped to research the technical difference there, but there *is* one
because root's been a happy little name-bearing camper ever since I
made that change. :)

There is a "danger" in going the bind route. It's something I learned
on the fly. If you delete a whole operating system off of a partition
while archives are still *symlinked*, your hoard stays safe in place.
I just tested that one last time to make sure, and *mine* does stay in
place.

If you delete an entire operating system while /var/cache/apt/archives
is still live via "mount --bind"

Kiss your absolute entire hoard goodbye even though it's housed one
step off from the operating system you're deleting. *oops!*

Something I also learned after having mistyped something at some point
is that you can bind more than one directory to that archives path. I
don't know if that's technically sound, but mount doesn't complain and
it works!

My various hoards are named things like "apt-bind", "apt-etc", and
"apt-i386". I also tested that just for this and was able to see the
contents of apt-bind and apt-etc displayed at the same time under
archives when using "mount -B" for both.

It doesn't work like that for symlink. *For me*, symlink instead
throws a (basically useless) secondary symlink inside of archives for
each additional directory I might try to symlink after the first, raw,
original symlink is created. It's something that makes sense as part
of symlink's design. It just doesn't work for painlessly trying to
bring a bunch of hoarded archive files together in one place.

Again, I don't know how technically "sound" my "mount -B" method is
over time, especially when binding more than one directory into the
same place. I *do* know that it has been working very painlessly *for
me* for about 8 months to a year now. If you do a lot of temporary
sandbox playing with things like debootstrap'ing and test-driving new
operating systems all the time, you just GOTTA remember to unmount
before you wipe a partition clean else *OUCH*. :)

Cindy :)
-- 
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA

* runs with duct tape *

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Brian]

On Sun 07 Oct 2018 at 08:32:42 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:

[snip]

> What should I be reading?

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/06/msg00510.html

-- 
Brian.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

On 10/07/2018 08:45 AM, Dan Purgert wrote:

Richard Owlett wrote:

[...]
Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
What should I be reading?
TIA


I think so, but it may be more manual than you'd otherwise do.


NOT a problem.
I've lots of time. Data cap is the constraint. My routine since Squeeze 
had been install from complete DVD sets - was on 56k dial-up at the time 
and the habit stuck.




Perhaps you should look into apt-cache-ng (IIRC) or squid to facilitate
automatic caching.


That would handle future problems. I'll read up on them to see if it 
gives hints for current situation.



 Ive used the latter to good effect on slow ( "up to
5 mbps") connections in public labs at a local library (although its
been some time since ive done work there - they moved to windows)



Thank you.

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Reco]

Hi.

On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 08:32:42AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
> All my machines have use Stretch DVD1 for installation.
> I have a low monthly data cap - currently at my limit.
> One machine has an apt-get update and upgrade with the addition of some 
> packages not on DVD1.
> I've not intentionally deleted any cached files.
> Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
> What should I be reading?

I second Dan's advice. Start with:

apt show apt-cacher-ng

Then use the thing.

Reco

Re: Upgrading with a low data cap

[Dan Purgert]

Richard Owlett wrote:
> [...]
> Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
> What should I be reading?
> TIA

I think so, but it may be more manual than you'd otherwise do. 

Perhaps you should look into apt-cache-ng (IIRC) or squid to facilitate
automatic caching.  Ive used the latter to good effect on slow ( "up to
5 mbps") connections in public labs at a local library (although its
been some time since ive done work there - they moved to windows)

-- 
|_|O|_| Registered Linux user #585947
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

Upgrading with a low data cap

[Richard Owlett]

All my machines have use Stretch DVD1 for installation.
I have a low monthly data cap - currently at my limit.
One machine has an apt-get update and upgrade with the addition of some 
packages not on DVD1.

I've not intentionally deleted any cached files.
Is it possible to use the cached data on another machine?
What should I be reading?
TIA