[rhn-users] local repository because of slow up2date?

[Trice, Jim]

Paul,
    I use yum and set up a repository on an apache server. I compiled yum
from sources. The only trick was using the -DESTDIR=/ switch when running
configure. Off the top of my head I can't remember where I got createrepo but
it's in the yum docs somewhere.
    Once it's all set up you just have to set one of your machines to just
download and not install when running up2date then copy the rpm's out of the
spool directory to your repo update directory and run createrepo. Run yum
update on each of the client machines and then "up2date -p" or just wait a
few hours for rhn to update.
     It's not fully automated but I like to know what's being updated when
anyway and it doesn't take much effort.
     Jim 
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 16:01:20 +0200
> From: Paul Dekkers <Paul.Dekkers at surfnet.nl>
> Subject: [rhn-users] local repository because of slow up2date?
> To: rhn-users at redhat.com
> Message-ID: <42A84BB0.5030404 at surfnet.nl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We're starting to have more and more RH systems, and the thing I always
> find frustrating is the download-speeds I get with up2date. (I'm used to
> fast downloads for about everything else ;-)) Since I cannot use another
> public mirror (since there are none?) with RH, I wonder if it's possible
> to create my own.
> 
> I know there is something like the RHN proxy server (and sattelite), but
> as far as I know they have some strange requirements (2.1 box) and cost
> a vast amount of money that I don't want to spend on this.
> Is it possible to just have the RPMs I need downloaded, or cached or
> something and updated via yum or up2date somehow?
> 
> For example: I only get ~70-90 k/sec at this moment, and the update
> after my AS 3 U3 installation takes for about half an hour :-(
> (The iso image download isn't fast either btw, that's why I didn't
> download newer iso's.)
> 
> Paul
> 
> P.S. I almost wonder if something like centos or xos linux wouldn't be
> better; the updates are at least provided with a different mechanism and
> I can use a local mirror for that (even one that is on our backbone :-)).
>