Re: http.debian.net hash sum mismatch
On 02/04/2014 01:53 AM, Rick Thomas wrote: On Feb 3, 2014, at 8:37 PM, Scott Ferguson scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com wrote: Mirrors were updating a couple of days ago and if you tried to use one during the updating period you would get errors. Could be the problem. What would it take to make a mirror update atomically? For example, download all the updates, get everything staged and ready to go but not yet visible to http clients, then at the flip of a switch, have all the updates become visible at once, perhaps with some kind of a callback to the currently active clients to tell them that things have changed and they should re-get everything. Maybe LVM snapshots would be helpful here? It wouldn't take anything, if the mirror is following the directions on http://www.debian.org/mirror/ftpmirror Specifically MUST perform a 2-stage sync which is to avoid this very problem. Rationale: if archive mirroring is done in a single stage, there will be periods of time during which the index files will reference files not yet mirrored. It would require some re-thinking of the protocol used by apt-get/aptitude -- to be sure the stuff you just downloaded is still current and hasn't been changed by an update while you were downloading... and minimize wasted effort by recognizing an update as early as possible. I politely disagree on this point, this is something well outside of a package manager's jurisdiction. It's up to the mirror to say what's available. Another thing to look at is if there are any proxy/caching servers involved that may be serving old versions of the indexes. Just a thought... Rick Its a good thought, that's why the maintainers ask mirrors do this this way. :) - PaulNM -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52f0a40d.5060...@paulscrap.com
Re: http.debian.net hash sum mismatch
On Feb 4, 2014, at 12:25 AM, PaulNM deb...@paulscrap.com wrote: On 02/04/2014 01:53 AM, Rick Thomas wrote: On Feb 3, 2014, at 8:37 PM, Scott Ferguson scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com wrote: Mirrors were updating a couple of days ago and if you tried to use one during the updating period you would get errors. Could be the problem. What would it take to make a mirror update atomically? For example, download all the updates, get everything staged and ready to go but not yet visible to http clients, then at the flip of a switch, have all the updates become visible at once, perhaps with some kind of a callback to the currently active clients to tell them that things have changed and they should re-get everything. Maybe LVM snapshots would be helpful here? It wouldn't take anything, if the mirror is following the directions on http://www.debian.org/mirror/ftpmirror Specifically MUST perform a 2-stage sync which is to avoid this very problem. Rationale: if archive mirroring is done in a single stage, there will be periods of time during which the index files will reference files not yet mirrored. Ahhh... That's good. I didn't know that. Which just goes to show the relevance of the maxim: Read the documentation before you try to 'fix' it! It would require some re-thinking of the protocol used by apt-get/aptitude -- to be sure the stuff you just downloaded is still current and hasn't been changed by an update while you were downloading... and minimize wasted effort by recognizing an update as early as possible. I politely disagree on this point, this is something well outside of a package manager's jurisdiction. It's up to the mirror to say what's available. Another thing to look at is if there are any proxy/caching servers involved that may be serving old versions of the indexes. Indeed. It's the presence of proxy/cacheing servers (specifically, http.debian.net) that prompted this discussion in the first place. So let me re-phrase the question: What would it take to make the apt-get protocol robust in the face of updates in combination with proxy and/or caching servers? Just a thought... Rick Its a good thought, that's why the maintainers ask mirrors do this this way. :) Thanks for correcting my misunderstandings! (-: Still thinking... Rick -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/77cd6716-bad3-4aff-bfaf-4ee9064d3...@pobox.com
RE: http.debian.net hash sum mismatch
Has anybody else experienced problems over the last couple of days? Or is there a local fix I can apply? I too have had this issue for a couple of days now. Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/006901cf20d1$9115$b33f$@allums.com
Re: http.debian.net hash sum mismatch
I too have had this issue for a couple of days now. Mark I've emailed Raphael -- rob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOZWb-p-MFahSMxY5dSQJM6QWer_bq+=kwaNym=xfwjfrqu...@mail.gmail.com
Re: http.debian.net hash sum mismatch
On 02/03/2014 06:17 PM, Mark Allums wrote: Has anybody else experienced problems over the last couple of days? Or is there a local fix I can apply? I too have had this issue for a couple of days now. Same here, but it went away yesterday. -- Rick Valenzuela Videojournalist Phnom Penh, Cambodia www.rickv.com GnuPG ID: 0xD5644029 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52f06bcf.70...@rickv.com
Re: http.debian.net hash sum mismatch
On 04/02/14 15:25, Rick Valenzuela wrote: On 02/03/2014 06:17 PM, Mark Allums wrote: Has anybody else experienced problems over the last couple of days? Or is there a local fix I can apply? I too have had this issue for a couple of days now. Same here, but it went away yesterday. Mirrors were updating a couple of days ago and if you tried to use one during the updating period you would get errors. Could be the problem. Kind regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52f06e8b.2060...@gmail.com
Re: http.debian.net hash sum mismatch
On Feb 3, 2014, at 8:37 PM, Scott Ferguson scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com wrote: Mirrors were updating a couple of days ago and if you tried to use one during the updating period you would get errors. Could be the problem. What would it take to make a mirror update atomically? For example, download all the updates, get everything staged and ready to go but not yet visible to http clients, then at the flip of a switch, have all the updates become visible at once, perhaps with some kind of a callback to the currently active clients to tell them that things have changed and they should re-get everything. Maybe LVM snapshots would be helpful here? It would require some re-thinking of the protocol used by apt-get/aptitude -- to be sure the stuff you just downloaded is still current and hasn't been changed by an update while you were downloading... and minimize wasted effort by recognizing an update as early as possible. Just a thought... Rick -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8351ab1f-d773-4eaf-b029-c988b0f17...@pobox.com
http.debian.net hash sum mismatch
Has anybody else experienced problems over the last couple of days? Or is there a local fix I can apply? For ref: About http.debian.net Brought to you by Raphael Geissert, it aims to solve the problem of choosing a Debian mirror, among other issues. The redirector uses the geo and network location of the user and the mirrors, the architecture of the requested files, IP address family, the availability and freshness of the mirrors, and a few other things. It is constantly improved. The result: it selects the best mirror that can serve the file. Give the demonstration a try! If you are familiar with cdn.debian.net you should think of http.debian.net as a superior replacement. Thanks -- rob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOZWb-pT+pNXN=8ss8_obf3m7yuya_fq81fcyfahc+6g9gy...@mail.gmail.com
