I'm a bit confused about this, can anyone clarify?
My interpretation is that mdeslaur is saying that because updates are in
the normal ubuntu repositories, and in the sources.list files
security.ubuntu.com is listed last, then so long as there is no problem
with the archive repo, files will *not*
** Tags added: precise
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1438025
Title:
please add security.ubuntu.com to the ubuntu mirrors
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.
** Changed in: apt-cacher-ng (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1438025
I don't believe this to be correct, as that's really only a temporary
mirror for security updates, see
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ArchiveAdministration#Copying_security_uploads_to_updates
for more information
** Changed in: apt-cacher-ng (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Invalid
--
You received this
It looks like I might have misunderstood the use here, I'm hoping Marc
can clarify whether or not this is actually helpful
** Changed in: apt-cacher-ng (Ubuntu)
Status: Invalid = New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
We should also wait for input from Eduard who maintains the package in
Debian as well as being the upstream dev (thanks for your work!). More
specifically, what happens if one of the mirrors in the pool is only a
partial mirror? Will that possibly lead to problems?
** Description changed:
-
This shouldn't be needed. Not only is the security pocket available on
all regular mirrors, but security updates also get copied to the
-updates pocket after a few minutes.
The only reason we preconfigure security.ubuntu.com by default is to
make sure users get security updates even when their
Marc, of course this isn't necessary. Acng isn't necessary. Apt can
work just fine downloading each and every *.deb file for every client.
Caching is totally optional. Yet, why download the same package again
when it is already there locally? To avoid duplicate downloads of the
same information
