Re: Using apt-get upgrade-Any way to get list first? Solved!
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 08:08:18PM -0600, will trillich wrote: try apt-setup or if you don't have that, apt-get install base-config which provides it. it lets you select, first of all, which method (http/ftp) to use. my sources.list resembles this: deb http://security.debian.org potato/updates main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.digex.net/debian/ stable main non-free contrib # deb-src http://ftp.digex.net/debian/ stable main non-free contrib deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free Thanks for the info. apparently ftp was designed for nosing around, checking out directory listings, downloading a file, maybe another, moving on to another directory... whereas http was designed for here's that file you asked for thus making http quicker, protocol-wise. It's just that a while ago I had heard the opposite, that http was for looking around and so slower. Maybe things have changed. Thanks again, this is a big help. Jonathan -- Hey, I think I finally got the hang of i-
Re: Using apt-get upgrade-Any way to get list first? Solved!
Jonathan Gift wrote: On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 08:08:18PM -0600, will trillich wrote: try apt-setup or if you don't have that, apt-get install base-config which provides it. it lets you select, first of all, which method (http/ftp) to use. my sources.list resembles this: deb http://security.debian.org potato/updates main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.digex.net/debian/ stable main non-free contrib # deb-src http://ftp.digex.net/debian/ stable main non-free contrib deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free Thanks for the info. apparently ftp was designed for nosing around, checking out directory listings, downloading a file, maybe another, moving on to another directory... whereas http was designed for here's that file you asked for thus making http quicker, protocol-wise. It's just that a while ago I had heard the opposite, that http was for looking around and so slower. Maybe things have changed. my first impression was the same. but when you think about it -- you web browser asks you what address to look up. you give it the full address; if the server redirects the browser, it's the server's responsibility to do so correctly -- at any rate, every image the http protocol inlines into your web pages, are all specified in advance. each one is merely gimme file path/to/item! ftp on the other hand -- if you've ever used ftp from the command line or even via a web browser -- ftp ftp.somewhere.org.tld user: nobody password: somethingelse careful, we'll track everything you do! ls files files files cd /path ls files files files cd subpath ls files files files image get some-file-or-other once the transfer starts, they should be about the same, but there's lots of overhead for ftp. (okay, i'm exaggerating; if you know exactly which file to ftp in advance, you can skip all the LS and CD, but there's still some extra finagling that HTTP doesn't need.) -- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dontUthink.com/
Re: Using apt-get upgrade-Any way to get list first? Solved!
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 01:37:54AM -0600, will trillich wrote: but there's lots of overhead for ftp. (okay, i'm exaggerating; if you know exactly which file to ftp in advance, you can skip all the LS and CD, but there's still some extra finagling that HTTP doesn't need.) Good point. I think they were also talking of general use. Obviously clicking on web pages is slower, whait with graphics, etc. But a direct http link would be another matter. Anyway, I'll stick to the http. Thanks for the help. Jonathan -- Hey, I think I finally got the hang of i-
Re: Using apt-get upgrade-Any way to get list first? Solved!
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 06:44:47PM +0200, Tommi Komulainen wrote: On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 04:54:20PM -0500, Mullins, Ron wrote: If you use APT, you can 'apt-get upgrade -u' which will show you the packages to be upgraded. You can then say no to continuing and put on hold anything that you don't want coming down the pipe. You can achieve the same by adding the following line in /etc/apt/apt.conf, with the exception that you will never again need to manually add the -u on the command line: APT::Get::Show-Upgraded yes; cool! hey, wanna rub your eyeballs over my apt-get intro? i bet you can find something misleading or off-kilter there... http://eGroups.com/files/newbieDoc/apt-get-intro.html i'd appreciate it if you would -- and if you'd change anything, lemme know. -- There are only two places in the world where time takes precedence over the job to be done. School and prison. --William Glasser [EMAIL PROTECTED]***http://www.dontUthink.com/ volunteer to document your experience for next week's newbies -- http://www.eGroups.com/messages/newbieDoc
Re: Using apt-get upgrade-Any way to get list first? Solved!
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 11:26:53AM +0100, Jonathan Gift wrote: BTW, do you know the deb ftp address for sources.list? I only have the http one and the ftp would be faster. there's just been a thread recently about ftp vs. http, and how http should be faster. to see if it's true for you, munge your sources.list to use FTP, and do apt-get update and then put it back to HTTP, and do apt-get update again and see which one really really sucks. BTW, which is the fastest? And do you happen to have the sources.list path for ftp? I'll give it a try. try apt-setup or if you don't have that, apt-get install base-config which provides it. it lets you select, first of all, which method (http/ftp) to use. my sources.list resembles this: deb http://security.debian.org potato/updates main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.digex.net/debian/ stable main non-free contrib # deb-src http://ftp.digex.net/debian/ stable main non-free contrib deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free # deb-src http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free apparently ftp was designed for nosing around, checking out directory listings, downloading a file, maybe another, moving on to another directory... whereas http was designed for here's that file you asked for thus making http quicker, protocol-wise. -- There are only two places in the world where time takes precedence over the job to be done. School and prison. --William Glasser [EMAIL PROTECTED]***http://www.dontUthink.com/ volunteer to document your experience for next week's newbies -- http://www.eGroups.com/messages/newbieDoc
Using apt-get upgrade-Any way to get list first? Solved!
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 04:54:20PM -0500, Mullins, Ron wrote: I don't see anyone having replied yet, so If you use APT, you can 'apt-get upgrade -u' which will show you the packages to be upgraded. You can then say no to continuing and put on hold anything that you don't want coming down the pipe. They did, thanks, and one with the same advice. I'll cc this to the list so no one else gets caught. BTW, do you know the deb ftp address for sources.list? I only have the http one and the ftp would be faster. Thanks Jonathan -- Hey, I think I finally got the hang of i-
Re: Using apt-get upgrade-Any way to get list first? Solved!
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 07:10:23AM +0100, Jonathan Gift wrote: On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 04:54:20PM -0500, Mullins, Ron wrote: I don't see anyone having replied yet, so If you use APT, you can 'apt-get upgrade -u' which will show you the packages to be upgraded. You can then say no to continuing and put on hold anything that you don't want coming down the pipe. They did, thanks, and one with the same advice. I'll cc this to the list so no one else gets caught. BTW, do you know the deb ftp address for sources.list? I only have the http one and the ftp would be faster. there's just been a thread recently about ftp vs. http, and how http should be faster. to see if it's true for you, munge your sources.list to use FTP, and do apt-get update and then put it back to HTTP, and do apt-get update again and see which one really really sucks. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]***http://www.dontUthink.com/ volunteer to document your experience for next week's newbies -- http://www.eGroups.com/messages/newbieDoc
Re: Using apt-get upgrade-Any way to get list first? Solved!
BTW, do you know the deb ftp address for sources.list? I only have the http one and the ftp would be faster. there's just been a thread recently about ftp vs. http, and how http should be faster. to see if it's true for you, munge your sources.list to use FTP, and do apt-get update and then put it back to HTTP, and do apt-get update again and see which one really really sucks. BTW, which is the fastest? And do you happen to have the sources.list path for ftp? I'll give it a try. Thanks Jonathan -- Hey, I think I finally got the hang of i-
Re: Using apt-get upgrade-Any way to get list first? Solved!
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 04:54:20PM -0500, Mullins, Ron wrote: If you use APT, you can 'apt-get upgrade -u' which will show you the packages to be upgraded. You can then say no to continuing and put on hold anything that you don't want coming down the pipe. You can achieve the same by adding the following line in /etc/apt/apt.conf, with the exception that you will never again need to manually add the -u on the command line: APT::Get::Show-Upgraded yes; -- Tommi Komulainen [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG 1024D/68388EE66FD6 DD79 EB38 BF6F 3533 09C0 04A8 9871 6838 8EE6 pgpItUnfY2edn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Q: Using apt-get upgrade-Any way to get list first? Solved!
Thanks for the feedback. Someone had earlier also suggested using apt(get -u upgrade to get the list and it worked. I'll keep yours on file as well. Jonathan -- Hey, I think I finally got the hang of i-
