Re: Which package cacher to use?
Hi, Dato.
On Mar 12 2009, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> I’d recommend approx.
Thanks. That's what decided to use.
> > * Is it able to cope with multiple architectures?
> > * Can it support multiple distributions? Supporting Debian, Ubuntu and
> > other non-official repositories would be really handy.
> > * Does it keep a directory hierarchy neatly organized like the Debian
> > archive?
>
> Yes, yes, and yes.
Those things should be on the comparison of the lwn. Even better would
be a chart listing all the weaknesses and strenghts of all solutions.
> Additionally, I think this question is not completely OT here, since
> (and Rogério confirmed it was for this purpose) a package cacher is an
> essential tool in the life of every maintainer (or, at least, for the
> intersection between those who care about building in a clean
> environment, and those who can’t afford a local mirror).
Indeed. It seems that this subject is of considerable importance for
having been discussed on a lwn.net article and many threads on this very
list and, since the programs have been refactored, improved etc, it
seems that my question wasn't off-topic (especially for people who have
to build their packages on a clean environment, like Dato has affirmed).
Here are some quick references, but the list is sincerely not exhaustive.
http://lwn.net/Articles/318658/
http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2008/09/msg00329.html
Regards, Rogério Brito.
--
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{mackenzie,ime.usp}.br : GPG key 1024D/7C2CAEB8
http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito : http://meusite.mackenzie.com.br/rbrito
Projects: algorithms.berlios.de : lame.sf.net : vrms.alioth.debian.org
Reply to: