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. Don
