Am Sonntag, 06.04.03 um 14:15 Uhr schrieb David:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
On Sonntag, April 6, 2003, at 04:11 Uhr, Ben Hines wrote:
Committed mirroring code to fink, please test it.Just so I understand this. When I talked to bbraun and Feanor about the mirroring they said stuff had to be added so that mirroring is becoming possible. What you added is the functionality for the end user, correct?
DRM you said you had to add some code so that the Master Mirror Server know how to handle things, correct? How far is this effort along? I am asking because we will not be able to enable such mirroring unless there is some sort of infrastructure being built first. As I offered to the OpenDarwin team, I will be more than happy to do that once all of the software parts have been put into place.
David, what infrastructure is actually missing? :-) We have a mirror server, and we have the code in Fink CVS to use it... so, what's missing? Sure, more "master" mirrors in the future will be nice, but not needed to get things going...
Is this text clear to everyone:Personally I do not think that we should make it possible to use the Master Mirror first. The Master mirror should always be a last resort. THe official mirrors and the official homepage of a given source should be searched first. Why? There could always be some issue with our Master Mirror or the timing is unfortunate and while the info has updated, the source has not yet updated on the Master. That seems most unlikely, but it could happen and it would lead to a lot of confusion.
The Fink team maintains mirrors known as "Master" mirrors, which contain the
sources for all fink packages. You can choose to use these mirrors first,
last, never, or mixed in with regular mirrors. If you don't care, just select
the default.
OTOH, we very often run into troubles because some upstream maintainer removed the source tarball, or worse, silently changed it (although MD5's will catch this). So, I think for stable users users, searching the Master first makes a lot sense and will probably result in a much better experience IF our master mirrors are fast and "always" reachable.
Another example: a company or university wants to use Fink on all their systems and sets up some central server which hosts binaries, and also source files. They could configure their own master source mirror, so that users trying to build something from source do not have to go outside (which may not even be possible) to get the source.
We can argue which option should be default, but I see no reason to completely drop the MasterFirst option, but several to keep it. If it's not the default, then it can't harm average Joe User, can it?
This is a configuration screen which you are talking about. The reason that we allow for choice is that we have a very broad range of users with very different needs. Yes, for the plain simple non-geek user (do we those? <g>), this might be not interesting. But for others, it might. For example, you might for some reason not want to use our master mirrors at all (because they are slow). Or you may want to always try them first (see above for reasons :-). Or you may only want to go for it as a last resort (like you reasoned above). Or you might just want to treat it like any other mirror.<snip>
What mirror order should fink use when downloading sources? [1]Why make it a choice? Where I get my sources from is something I should not really be bothered with. I agree that there should be some sort of setting that can determine which mirror might be closest to me and thus enable me to download the fastest, yet when that choice fails a fallback mechanism which is automated should be in place.
An slightly orthogonal issue to this (on which we have an open FR) is as to the order in which Fink tries mirrors. Closes first is only good to a degree. The idea on the FR is to "order" the servers based on ping results. While that (as I argued) doesn't give any info on the servers transfer speed, a server with a low latency is more likely to be fast than one with a low one... and you can sort out servers you can#t reach at all this way, too. We might want to implement something like this as an optional feature in "fink configure". Of course this approach has its own problems, e.g. we might want to put in some randomness lest all people are swamping the same (fast ping) servers... But I am digressing :-)
Cheers,
Max
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: ValueWeb: Dedicated Hosting for just $79/mo with 500 GB of bandwidth! No other company gives more support or power for your dedicated server
http://click.atdmt.com/AFF/go/sdnxxaff00300020aff/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
