[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Fedora Core 2 Update: kernel-2.6.6-1.435

Pedro Fernandes Macedo said:
> On Mon, 2004-06-14 at 23:17, Don Russell wrote:

>> On the other hand, if redhat does not push file updates to the mirrors,
>> then there can be a very large delay in mirrors getting synch'd again
>> because now you're on somebody elses schedule.
> Not a lot. Most mirrors have a short interval between syncs (30 minutes
> usually)[considering the information for mirrors of fedora.us , which is
> very similar to the common mirroring practice used by most mirror
> admins]. Others have a larger interval (when I had a mirror at work, I
> used to sync it daily).

Excellent... the idea is starting take shape.. :-)

>> Back to your idea of a cron job that lists all files from the mirror and
>> diffs them.... that would not take as much bandwidth as you might
>> think...
>> the list of files to get can be optimized by getting only files updated
>> since a specific date/time... the last date/time the mirror was known to
>> be synch'd.
> Well , I considered it a waste because I didnt dig enough... All you
> need to get is the directory listing , which is just a few KB (16KB as
> of today). Probably a wise use of the correct HTTP headers can save some
> KB during the day, by just getting recently modified indexes (but I
> guess this wouldnt work , because for the main RH server , the index
> page for the updates directory is generated on demand by the web
> server... maybe I'm saying some stupid things here, because I never
> studied the HTTP protocol .. just used it on a daily basis ;P )

For the sake of saving a few K of bytes transferred, it's probably not
worth the extra complexity in the code to keep track of dates...

>> This would improve the reliability of up2date. Even if I understand why
>> up2date fails, it's still frustrating when it doesn't work "properly"
>> and
>> I have to try repeatedly to do what should be a simple task.
> I agree. Maybe we could find a good way to detect these changes , code
> them in python and then post it in bugzilla as a RFE with a patch...

What would we be patching? I don't see any change to up2date itself on the
Fedora client/workstation. The only change is on the server side that
up2date talks to... do we have that code too?

>> cdrecord...
>> I don't know what I ever did to get in this situation... but I see now
>> that they are not mutually exclusive.... I just have some sort of
>> problem
>> with an older version I guess... (I did an upgrade of FC1 to FC2)
> Probably this is the reason. (I dont know for sure , as I installed FC2
> from scratch). Here , a rpm -q --provides shows that the  cdrecord
> package provides dvdrecord now. Just remove your dvdrecord package and
> things will work.

You're a genius! That is, you have more experience than I do :-)
Thanks for the tip... removing dvdrecord solved it.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]