|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > September 2004 > ,deb's follow Packages files to mirrors: nuts or what?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
,deb's follow Packages files to mirrors: nuts or what?
|
|
| Dan Jacobson 2004-08-28, 5:48 pm |
| Isn't it nuts that the Packages files get to the mirrors before the
..debs do?
Wouldn't it be right if the Packages files got to the mirrors after
the .debs they list do?
Why don't you guys say anything? Anybody home? Tell me I'm not nuts.
Trying
ssh -o BatchMode\ yes -C mirror.where.you.have.shell.account.goes.here \
'set -eu;cd /home/ftp/debian; e=dists/sid/main/binary-i386/Packages;\
ls -ogc $e; t=/tmp/$LOGNAME.timestamp$$;\
touch -d "$(find $e -printf %c)" $t; find pool -cnewer $t -type f|wc -l;\
rm $t' #find pacakages newer than Packages. Paths approximate.
gives 1996 .deb's that got to the mirror _after_ the Packages file
describing them did today.
If the user tries an apt-get during the daily update, he will often
get lots of errors, and conclude Debian is broken.
Can't you see running the master mirror file list thru e.g., tac(1)
etc. could solve the problem?
What do you use to generate the list, find(1)? rsync -r? I'm sure
whatever you use, we can easily figure out a way to make sure the
Packages files get overwritten only after the packages they describe
arrive.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steinar H. Gunderson 2004-08-28, 5:48 pm |
| On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:41:26AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Wouldn't it be right if the Packages files got to the mirrors after
> the .debs they list do?
The mirror script I'm using (which I got from maswan, who is running
ftp.se.debian.org, our upstream) does two rsync rounds.
1. Update all .debs, don't delete anything.
2. Update Packages files and delete all .debs that no longer exists upstream.
This takes care of the problem; I'd be surprised if the other mirrors didn't
take approximately the same route.
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steve McIntyre 2004-08-28, 5:48 pm |
| Steinar Gunderson writes:
>On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:41:26AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
>
>The mirror script I'm using (which I got from maswan, who is running
>ftp.se.debian.org, our upstream) does two rsync rounds.
>
>1. Update all .debs, don't delete anything.
>2. Update Packages files and delete all .debs that no longer exists upstream.
>
>This takes care of the problem; I'd be surprised if the other mirrors didn't
>take approximately the same route.
Definitely. My mirror actually does it in 3 passes:
1. update debs/sources
2. update Packages/Sources
3. delete missing
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com
Can't keep my eyes from the circling sky,
Tongue-tied & twisted, Just an earth-bound misfit, I...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Chris Cheney 2004-08-28, 8:48 pm |
| On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 01:26:48AM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:41:26AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
>
> The mirror script I'm using (which I got from maswan, who is running
> ftp.se.debian.org, our upstream) does two rsync rounds.
>
> 1. Update all .debs, don't delete anything.
> 2. Update Packages files and delete all .debs that no longer exists upstream.
>
> This takes care of the problem; I'd be surprised if the other mirrors didn't
> take approximately the same route.
Most mirrors did not do this in the past, I don't know what their current
status is. When I used to maintain a bunch of servers at work I had
to be careful to only do the updates in the morning since in CST6CDT
(the TZ master/ftp-master also use) the archive was broken on all US
mirrors from ~ 2pm-5pm.
Chris
| |
| Marc Wilson 2004-08-28, 8:48 pm |
| On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:41:26AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Isn't it nuts that the Packages files get to the mirrors before the
> .debs do?
Not particularly. I can see you think it's inconvenient for YOU.
> Wouldn't it be right if the Packages files got to the mirrors after
> the .debs they list do?
<shrug> I can't see how it matters one way or the other. But then again,
I'm sure you're one of those who'll just die if he can't download whatever
he wants, instantly.
> Why don't you guys say anything? Anybody home? Tell me I'm not nuts.
Dan, pretty much because you have a reputation of filing spurious/useless
bugs.
> If the user tries an apt-get during the daily update, he will often
> get lots of errors, and conclude Debian is broken.
Then he concludes that Debian is broken. The world will hardly end if
there's one less shouldn't-be-using-testing-or-unstable person out there.
Or are you contending that this is a problem for a *release*?
--
Marc Wilson | Immanuel doesn't pun, he Kant.
msw@cox.net |
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Hamish Moffatt 2004-08-28, 8:48 pm |
| On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 07:08:05PM -0700, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:41:26AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
>
> Not particularly. I can see you think it's inconvenient for YOU.
>
>
> <shrug> I can't see how it matters one way or the other. But then again,
> I'm sure you're one of those who'll just die if he can't download whatever
> he wants, instantly.
>
>
> Dan, pretty much because you have a reputation of filing spurious/useless
> bugs.
Maybe so, but this isn't one of them. It isn't about not being able to
get new packages instantly -- the problem is that an apt-get or dselect
(etc) upgrade will FAIL because some packages couldn't be downloaded.
And it's for something like 3 hours every day.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steve Langasek 2004-08-29, 2:49 am |
| On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 07:08:05PM -0700, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:41:26AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Not particularly. I can see you think it's inconvenient for YOU.
You don't think our mirrors being broken for 3 or more hours every day
is a problem? How in the world could this be an ok situation?
Not that Dan Jacobson is right to think that every issue he notices for
the first time is immediately a crisis, but his high twit factor doesn't
warrant defending bugs.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Marcelo E. Magallon 2004-08-29, 5:52 pm |
| On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:41:26AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Isn't it nuts that the Packages files get to the mirrors before the
> .debs do?
>
> Wouldn't it be right if the Packages files got to the mirrors after
> the .debs they list do?
>
> Why don't you guys say anything? Anybody home? Tell me I'm not nuts.
Well, nuts... I'd call it lazyness (or lack of time).
I've helped someone hack a mirroring script that does just that. It
ignores the Packages files on the first run and doesn't delete
anything. On a second run, it fetches the Packages files and _then_
deletes the old files. It's not perfect, but it's better than fetching
a Packages file that refers to non existant versions.
Marcelo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Marc Wilson 2004-08-29, 5:52 pm |
| On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 12:02:20AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 07:08:05PM -0700, Marc Wilson wrote:
>
>
> You don't think our mirrors being broken for 3 or more hours every day
> is a problem? How in the world could this be an ok situation?
I think that it would be a horrific problem if it affected a stable
release. Does it? No. Does it affect a stable release at all? No.
Does it affect a significant enough percentage of the packages in testing
or unstable for it to be a serious problem? No.
What about the reverse situation? If you update the Packages file last,
then the *user* has a Packages file that may not match the contents of the
mirror, rather than the mirror having one that doesn't match. And now he
STILL can't install anything, and the mirror is claiming that the
out-of-date Packages file he has is the most current one.
Apologies if the mirror scripts already deal with files being obsoleted.
Use of testing or unstable implies a certain level of intelligence. Next
you're going to say that we should do something to make sure that a user
doesn't have to use 'apt-get update' to make sure he has the latest
Packages file before trying to install something, since, after all, that
case would cause breakage as well.
--
Marc Wilson | All warranty and guarantee clauses become null and
msw@cox.net | void upon payment of invoice.
| |
|
| Hello.
Marc Wilson:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:41:26AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
>
> Not particularly. I can see you think it's inconvenient for YOU.
It was inconvenient enough for me to settle on using ftp.debian.org
instead of the suggested ftp.pl.debian.org. I'm not sure this is
something we'd like to encourage, though.
> But then again, I'm sure you're one of those who'll just
> die if he can't download whatever he wants, instantly.
Nice.
>
> Then he concludes that Debian is broken. The world will hardly end if
> there's one less shouldn't-be-using-testing-or-unstable person out there.
This I agree with completely. That said, IMHO it's much more elegant and
pleasant if my daily cronjob of `apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade -d`
either works as advertised or doesn't download anything.
Cheers,
-- Shot (Piotr Szotkowski)
--
That being done, all you have to do next is call free() slightly
less often than malloc(). You may want to examine the Solaris system
libraries for a particularly ambitious implementation of this technique.
~~~ Eric O'Dell, comp.lang.dylan ~~~
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steve Langasek 2004-08-29, 8:49 pm |
| On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 12:13:10PM -0700, Marc Wilson wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 12:02:20AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I think that it would be a horrific problem if it affected a stable
> release. Does it? No. Does it affect a stable release at all? No.
Sure it does; this bug affects stable every time there's a point
release.
Though my gut feeling is that the majority of downloads from the Debian
mirrors pull from testing/unstable anyway -- not by volume of users, but
because testing/unstable users have systems needing much more frequent
updates. Problems should not be dismissed just because they only affect
testing and unstable.
> Does it affect a significant enough percentage of the packages in testing
> or unstable for it to be a serious problem? No.
Sure it is; the percentage of users affected by the problem is not
directly proportional to the percentage of packages updated on a given
day.
> What about the reverse situation? If you update the Packages file last,
> then the *user* has a Packages file that may not match the contents of the
> mirror, rather than the mirror having one that doesn't match. And now he
> STILL can't install anything, and the mirror is claiming that the
> out-of-date Packages file he has is the most current one.
You clearly didn't read the parts of this thread where people discussed
correct, two-pass methods of mirroring the archive that ensure the files
available on all mirrors are self-consistent at all times.[1]
> Use of testing or unstable implies a certain level of intelligence.
Running a mirror does, too. Please stop defending broken mirror
implementations. The only thing this does is ensure that users will
switch to a different mirror.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
[1] Technically, to have this true at *all* times requires three passes,
but two passes gets close enough that the period of unusability is
negligible.
| |
| Dan Jacobson 2004-09-02, 6:55 pm |
| If the Packages files are updated last, then only one mirroring run is needed.
Assuming a normal safety net of a few older .deb versions being left
on the mirror, `apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade` users will
merely still seamlessly get today's picture until tomorrow's update is
complete.
Indeed, it is instead the bug defenders' apt-get that "just die if he
can't download whatever he wants, instantly."
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Goswin von Brederlow 2004-09-02, 6:55 pm |
| Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org> writes:
> If the Packages files are updated last, then only one mirroring run is needed.
>
> Assuming a normal safety net of a few older .deb versions being left
> on the mirror, `apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade` users will
> merely still seamlessly get today's picture until tomorrow's update is
> complete.
>
> Indeed, it is instead the bug defenders' apt-get that "just die if he
> can't download whatever he wants, instantly."
Rsync mirrors alphabetically and then dists is before pool, Packages
before debs.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Dan Jacobson 2004-09-02, 6:55 pm |
| Goswin> Rsync mirrors alphabetically and then dists is before pool,
Goswin> Packages before debs.
Well, then instead of
$ rsync debian $destination
we can do
$ rsync debian/pool debian/dists $destination
or
$ rsync debian/pool $destination && rsync debian/dists $destination
etc. etc. No?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Colin Watson 2004-09-02, 6:55 pm |
| On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 03:17:53AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Goswin> Rsync mirrors alphabetically and then dists is before pool,
> Goswin> Packages before debs.
>
> Well, then instead of
> $ rsync debian $destination
> we can do
> $ rsync debian/pool debian/dists $destination
> or
> $ rsync debian/pool $destination && rsync debian/dists $destination
> etc. etc. No?
Not if you're doing a partial mirror (e.g. unstable only), in which case
you need to have the Packages and Sources files first in order to work
out what to mirror.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Thomas Bushnell BSG 2004-09-02, 6:55 pm |
| Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> writes:
> Not if you're doing a partial mirror (e.g. unstable only), in which case
> you need to have the Packages and Sources files first in order to work
> out what to mirror.
Sure, but in that case you can fetch those without installing them,
figure out what to mirror, and then install your modified files.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Colin Watson 2004-09-02, 6:55 pm |
| On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 05:02:10PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> writes:
>
> Sure, but in that case you can fetch those without installing them,
> figure out what to mirror, and then install your modified files.
Yeah, that would make sense. Anyone want to implement that in debmirror?
:-)
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steinar H. Gunderson 2004-09-02, 6:55 pm |
| On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 01:09:37AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Yeah, that would make sense. Anyone want to implement that in debmirror?
> :-)
Is it worth it, given that the archive is going to be split in parts anyhow?
ftpmasters (if anybody is lurking on the list; this isn't important enough
for a Cc ;-) ), is this being considered along with the architecture split?
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Colin Watson 2004-09-02, 6:55 pm |
| On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 12:50:22PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 01:09:37AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
>
> Is it worth it, given that the archive is going to be split in parts anyhow?
To me, this seems orthogonal to the architecture split. The usual
partial mirror case is picking some of stable, testing, and unstable.
Cheers,
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@debian.org]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Goswin von Brederlow 2004-09-02, 6:55 pm |
| Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 05:02:10PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> Yeah, that would make sense. Anyone want to implement that in debmirror?
> :-)
>
> --
> Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
debmirror (20040729) unstable; urgency=low
* Download meta files to temp directory first (Closes: #219977)
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Colin Watson 2004-09-02, 6:55 pm |
| On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 02:33:43PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> writes:
>
> debmirror (20040729) unstable; urgency=low
>
> * Download meta files to temp directory first (Closes: #219977)
Nice. Thanks!
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@debian.org]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Dan Jacobson 2004-09-05, 2:47 am |
| Allow us to review the reality of debian mirrors (m) several hours per day.
# apt-get update
# apt-get dist-upgrade
Get:1 m sid/main bash-builtins 3.0-6 [97.9kB]
Get:2 m sid/main debconf-i18n 1.4.34 [77.4kB]
Get:3 m sid/main debconf 1.4.34 [99.6kB]
Get:4 m sid/main bash 3.0-6 [782kB]
Err m sid/main imlib-base 1.9.14-16
404 Not Found
Get:5 m sid/main gcc-3.3-base 1:3.3.4-11 [147kB]
Get:6 m sid/main libstdc++5 1:3.3.4-11 [293kB]
Err m sid/main libkpathsea3 2.0.2-21
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main tetex-bin 2.0.2-21
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main tetex-base 2.0.2b-4
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main tetex-doc 2.0.2b-4
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main tetex-extra 2.0.2b-4
404 Not Found
Get:7 m sid/main libisc7 1:9.2.3+9.2.4-rc7-1 [153kB]
Get:8 m sid/main libdns11 1:9.2.3+9.2.4-rc7-1 [455kB]
Get:9 m sid/main bind9-host 1:9.2.3+9.2.4-rc7-1 [93.3kB]
Get:10 m sid/main binutils 2.15-2 [2221kB]
Get:11 m sid/main cpp-3.3 1:3.3.4-11 [1391kB]
Get:12 m sid/main liblwres1 1:9.2.3+9.2.4-rc7-1 [89.2kB]
Get:13 m sid/main dnsutils 1:9.2.3+9.2.4-rc7-1 [161kB]
Get:14 m sid/main gcc-3.3 1:3.3.4-11 [1564kB]
Get:15 m sid/main libstdc++5-3.3-dev 1:3.3.4-11 [775kB]
Get:16 m sid/main g++-3.3 1:3.3.4-11 [1776kB]
Err m sid/main strace 4.5.7-1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main w3m 0.5.1-3
404 Not Found
Get:17 m sid/main bash-doc 3.0-6 [714kB]
Get:18 m sid/main binutils-doc 2.15-2 [426kB]
Get:19 m sid/main cdda2wav 4:2.0+a38-1 [157kB]
Get:20 m sid/main cdrecord 4:2.0+a38-1 [575kB]
Get:21 m sid/main cdrtools-doc 4:2.0+a38-1 [291kB]
Err m sid/main imlib11 1.9.14-17
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main libpth2 2.0.1-2
404 Not Found
Get:22 m sid/main debconf-doc 1.4.34 [156kB]
Get:23 m sid/main debconf-utils 1.4.34 [33.0kB]
Err m sid/main po-debconf 0.8.13
404 Not Found
Get:24 m sid/main libgail17 1.6.6-1 [142kB]
Get:25 m sid/main libgail-common 1.6.6-1 [146kB]
Err m sid/main shared-mime-info 0.15-1
404 Not Found
Get:26 m sid/main eog 2.6.1-2 [710kB]
Err m sid/main libpq3 7.4.5-3
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main gdk-imlib1 1.9.14-16
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main mozilla-plugin-vlc 0.8.0-test1-1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main vlc-plugin-alsa 0.8.0-test1-1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main vlc-plugin-esd 0.8.0-test1-1
404 Not Found
Get:27 m sid/main libdvdnav4 0.1.9-3 [77.7kB]
Err m sid/main libxosd2 2.2.11-1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main ttf-freefont 20031008-1.1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main wxvlc 0.8.0-test1-1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main gnome-vlc 0.8.0-test1-1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main vlc 0.8.0-test1-1
404 Not Found
Get:28 m sid/main gv 1:3.5.8-36 [240kB]
Get:29 m sid/main hotplug 0.0.20040329-15 [60.6kB]
Err m sid/main imlib1 1.9.14-16
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main imgsizer 2.7-1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main liblo0 0.9-2
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main jamin 0.9.0-5
404 Not Found
Err m sid/non-free latex2html 2002-2-1-8
404 Not Found
Get:30 m sid/main libg2c0 1:3.3.4-11 [50.6kB]
Get:31 m sid/main libgcj-common 1:3.3.4-11 [1166B]
Get:32 m sid/main libgcj4 1:3.3.4-11 [2586kB]
Err m sid/main libsdl1.2debian 1.2.7-9
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main libsdl1.2debian-oss 1.2.7-9
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main libswfdec0 0.2.2-6
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main libtidy0 20040811-2
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main linkchecker 1.13.1-1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main menu 2.1.17
404 Not Found
Get:33 m sid/main mkisofs 4:2.0+a38-1 [525kB]
Err m sid/main postgresql-dev 7.4.5-3
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main python2.3-pygresql 1:3.5-1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main python-pygresql 1:3.5-1
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main swf-player 0.2.2-6
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main tidy 20040811-2
404 Not Found
Err m sid/main wp2x 2.5-mhi-6
404 Not Found
Failed to fetch m/debian/pool/main/i/imlib+png2/imlib-base_1.9.14-16_all.deb 404 Not Found
Failed to fetch m/debian/pool/main/t/tetex-bin/libkpathsea3_2.0.2-21_i386.deb 404 Not Found
Failed to fetch m/debian/pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_2.0.2-21_i386.deb 404 Not Found
etc. etc.
E: Some files failed to download
Looks like I hit it about mid alphabet today.
And I thought things would be safe by this time in the morning.
Good thing [average user] wasn't making a presentation or showing the
boss or doing something critical on the way to the airport, etc.
Great. A self inflicted denial of service attack against debian by debian.
Denial of service attack, no? Several hours a day.
Compare it to the impact of the average security announcement please.
Flagship package system, of all things. Core item, no?
Sorry for the long mail but it looks like nobody cares again.
It must be one of those north/south things where those in the
developed north aren't affected... oops, I mean east-west things,
where those in the developed west are tucked into bed when it happens,
so it's like ho hum for them, whilst those in the underprivileged time
zones get the full brunt.
I mean how do you update a website? Do you first update index.html
listing the files you hope to put in later. Or do you first put those
files in, and only then update index.html? Which is seamless?
Sure I'd love to help fix it. Email me the one file in question. I can't
test it though.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
|