Re: [NEW] apt-mirror, first port, questions
Stuart Henderson writes: > Since we don't seem to be making any progress on agreeing on an > additional uid range to use for ports (anything proposed so far either > bumps into ranges used in some developer large installations, or uses > high numbers resulting in concerns about large /var/log/lastlog if > they're ever used to login), and we get closer to running into the > default "normal user" uid range, I would lean towards not adding > user/group for this to help conserve "ports uids" and allow users to > handle that themselves. Thanks. I've attached my port. I chose the 'misc' category since nothing else really struck me as better. I've been using it for a week or so and had no issues. I've only run this on amd64. The local Ubuntu machine I'm testing with seems happy with it. My patches are as follows. The original makefile used $(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX) as the install location. The ports environment seems to already add $DESTDIR to $PREFIX so I removed $DESTDIR. Since I'm not creating a user, I also removed creation of the default mirror directories. The original apt-mirror script contains its own man page. I adusted it to remove mention of the apt-mirror user, and removed mention of a cron script since none was included in the upstream distribution. I also updated the description of where files are created. In the actual code of apt-mirror, I changed to use uname(1) to determine the default architecture if not otherwise provided in the config file, and changed handling of the base_path configuration so that relative paths work. In the default configuration file (mirrors.list) I changed the base_path from an absolute to relative location. I added a README that describes these changes and presents an example of how to use apt-mirror and httpd to run a local mirror site. Allan apt-mirror-0.5.4.tgz Description: apt-mirror port
Re: [NEW] apt-mirror, first port, questions
On 2020/11/12 18:09, Allan Streib wrote: > Hi all, > > First time porter, thought this seemed like something simple to get my > feet wet but I immediately ran into a few questions. > > I wanted to set up a local Ubuntu repository mirror on my network, using > an OpenBSD machine. apt-mirror is the tool for this, it's basically a > perl script that uses wget. > > https://github.com/apt-mirror/apt-mirror > > Firstly, is this worth having a port? It's simple enough to just install > as-is if someone wants it. Doesn't seem a bad idea. > The man page implies an "apt-mirror" user would normally run this via > cron to keep the mirror updated. Is it normal to create a new user and > group for something that isn't a daemon? It's a script any user can run. > > I'll submit my port for review after adapting based on any feedback. > > Thanks, > > Allan > Since we don't seem to be making any progress on agreeing on an additional uid range to use for ports (anything proposed so far either bumps into ranges used in some developer large installations, or uses high numbers resulting in concerns about large /var/log/lastlog if they're ever used to login), and we get closer to running into the default "normal user" uid range, I would lean towards not adding user/group for this to help conserve "ports uids" and allow users to handle that themselves.
[NEW] apt-mirror, first port, questions
Hi all, First time porter, thought this seemed like something simple to get my feet wet but I immediately ran into a few questions. I wanted to set up a local Ubuntu repository mirror on my network, using an OpenBSD machine. apt-mirror is the tool for this, it's basically a perl script that uses wget. https://github.com/apt-mirror/apt-mirror Firstly, is this worth having a port? It's simple enough to just install as-is if someone wants it. The man page implies an "apt-mirror" user would normally run this via cron to keep the mirror updated. Is it normal to create a new user and group for something that isn't a daemon? It's a script any user can run. I'll submit my port for review after adapting based on any feedback. Thanks, Allan
