Re: Package configure problem during Installation.
On Sat 26 Nov 2016 at 16:44:42 -0500, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Sat 26 Nov 2016 at 18:40:38 +0100, Sven Hartge wrote:
> >
> >> Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
> >> > I think viewing deb.debian.org as beta is fair. Viewing the redirector
> >> > as deprecated or about to be closed down in not correct. There is a
> >> > diversity of views in both threads.
> >>
> >> There are. But all more or less agree that httpredir.debian.org is
> >> unmaintained and just cruising along on auto-pilot.
> >
> > Very informative. Either would do for me in the UK, I think (assuming
> > httpredir.debian.org stays around). Should we now be recommending
> > deb.debian.org in user now? What do we get from it for our money?
>
> I went through the threads posted by you and Sven. I think you can
> recommend httpredir service untill there is a formal announcement of
> moving to deb.debian.org . The httpredir service is just not
> maintained but not deprecated. If it does not work as expected, bugs
> can be filed[1] with the following pseudo headers.
>
> Package: mirrors
> Severity: normal
> User: mirrors@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: httpredir
Seems to be a reasonable approach. Maybe deb.debian.org is better for
people with particular needs. I have to say I have generally done well
by the redirector in terms of speed and reliability.
The only thing I vaguely understand about the difference between the two
is that httpredir.debian.org uses the traditional mirror network whereas
deb.debian.org uses the Fastly CDN (Content Delivery Network) and there
is some caching going on. Because Fastly has local peering arrangements
mirror choices are supposed to be local (and hence faster). I've not
noticed any difference in a few short tests.
--
Brian.
--
Brian.
Reply to: