RFC: cleaning up updates and updates-testing

Charles R. Anderson cra at WPI.EDU
Sat Sep 11 05:33:17 UTC 2004


On Fri, Sep 10, 2004 at 11:53:15AM -0500, Steven Pritchard wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 11:59:21PM -0400, Charles R. Anderson wrote:
> > >From a mirroring perspective, it is much more efficient to have an
> > all-updates directory containing all the real files, and a
> > latest-updates directory containing only symlinks to the newest files
> > in the other directory.  That way rsync can sync the symlinks with
> > --delete and you don't have to download the files again when they
> > become obsolete and would otherwise be moved between directories.
> 
> But then there wouldn't be anything to --exclude easily (for mirrors
> concerned about space).

Sure there would.  Just download the latest-updates directory, 
following the symlink targets.

> To avoid the multiple-download problem, when the new update appears, a
> hard link to the old update could be created in the obsolete-updates
> directory.  The updates directory copy could then be deleted a week
> later (or whatever).  As long as mirrors are using rsync -H and
> mirroring regularly, they'd never need to re-download an update.

Not everyone uses rsync...  Symlinks could be supported by ftp 
mirroring.





More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list