Re: Which package cacher to use?
Hello,
This mailing list is not made for this kind of message. You should
consider sending it to debian-user.
On 12-03-2009, Rogério Brito <rbrito@ime.usp.br> wrote:
> Hi there.
>
> I seem to recall that, in the not so distant past, people were
> discussing here the subject of package chachers for the use of building
> (and rebuilding etc) packages from sources, something which is necessary
> for those that want to help with the mentoring process (or even building
> their own packages at home).
>
> OK, so, recently, "Linux Weekly News" has published an article (right at
> http://lwn.net/Articles/318658/) that made some simple comparisons
> between apt-cache, apt-proxy, approx and others and, to be honest, the
> article has just made me even more confused about which cacher to use.
>
> Worse, when I saw some bugs (e.g., #285360) on the BTS, I felt lost,
> since I need to use three arches.
>
> So, I would like to ask you:
>
> * what is the package chacher that you are using?
>
For now, I use approx. I was using apt-proxy before.
> * Is it able to cope with multiple architectures?
>
At least i386 and amd64.
> * Can it support multiple distributions? Supporting Debian, Ubuntu and
> other non-official repositories would be really handy.
>
Not sure for Debian/Ubuntu but you can host multiple repository (I have
3 differents one marillat, debian main and debian
security).
> * Does it keep a directory hierarchy neatly organized like the Debian
> archive?
>
Yes, it looks like.
Moreover, approx is straightforward to configure, memory efficient and
fast. I use it for years now, and I have no problem with it (apt-proxy
was failing quite sometime, I need to relaunch it frequently).
Regards
Sylvain Le Gall
Reply to: