* Petter Reinholdtsen [2010-06-20 19:39]:
> Yes, assuming it is done right after debootstrap, and before the extra
> packages (like the kernel) is done. The extra packages will be useful
> to cache for the LTSP chroot building.
I didn't hear any objections to this approach. Petter, can you plea
[Martin Michlmayr]
> I didn't hear any objections to this approach. Petter, can you
> please test the following patch to make sure it doesn't break LTSP
> (it shouldn't). If you confirm, I'll commit it.
Thanks to #589646, LTSP do no longer install in squeeze, so I can't
test at the moment. Work
[Martin Michlmayr]
> I didn't hear any objections to this approach. Petter, can you please
> test the following patch to make sure it doesn't break LTSP (it
> shouldn't). If you confirm, I'll commit it.
I tested this patch to bootstrap-base.postinst, and this did affect
LTSP negatively. :(
Wit
Package: base-installer
Version: 1.107
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Is there a reason why base-installer doesn't clear the apt cache after
installing base? I end up with about 70 MB of .debs in
/var/cache/apt/archives and this hurts on machines with little space
(such as machines with only 512
Hello Martion,
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Package: base-installer
> Version: 1.107
> Severity: wishlist
> Tags: patch
>
> Is there a reason why base-installer doesn't clear the apt cache after
> installing base? I end up with about 70 MB of .debs in
> /var/cache/
[Martin Michlmayr]
> Is there a reason why base-installer doesn't clear the apt cache
> after installing base? I end up with about 70 MB of .debs in
> /var/cache/apt/archives and this hurts on machines with little space
> (such as machines with only 512 MB flash storage).
When Debian Edu set up
On Saturday 19 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> cleanup () {
> + rm -f /target/var/cache/apt/archives/*.deb 2>/dev/null || true
> rm -f "$KERNEL_LIST" "$KERNEL_LIST.unfiltered"
> }
Shouldn't this call 'apt-get cleanup' in /target instead?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-b
* Petter Reinholdtsen [2010-06-19 19:38]:
> When Debian Edu set up its thin client server, the installer reuse the
> APT cache by bind-mounting /var/cache/apt/archives into the chroot to
> avoid having to download the same packages again when creating the
> LTSP chroot. Because of this, I would s
* Frans Pop [2010-06-20 07:17]:
> > cleanup () {
> > + rm -f /target/var/cache/apt/archives/*.deb 2>/dev/null || true
> > rm -f "$KERNEL_LIST" "$KERNEL_LIST.unfiltered"
> > }
>
> Shouldn't this call 'apt-get cleanup' in /target instead?
Yeah, I was wondering about that too. I wa
* Otavio Salvador [2010-06-19 12:35]:
> > The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and then
> > again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me. OK to
> > apply?
>
> Conceptually it is OK but why not move it to post-base-installer.d?
Well, my idea was to clean
[Martin Michlmayr]
> Would it be a major problem simply to use a web proxy instead? (Just
> curious).
For some sites, yes. :)
For others, no.
We do provide a squid proxy already as part of Debian Edu, but as this
reuse of the apt cache is an optimization, it should be fairly obvious
that it is a
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Otavio Salvador [2010-06-19 12:35]:
> > > The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and
> > > then again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me.
> > > OK to apply?
> >
> > Conceptually it is OK but why not mov
* Petter Reinholdtsen [2010-06-20 12:05]:
> Is it a major problem to wait until finish-install to clear the cache?
Yes, when you have only 512 MB of storage, those 70-80 MB of debs that
are downloaded during base install really hurt.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
--
To UNSUBSCR
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 6:37 AM, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Otavio Salvador [2010-06-19 12:35]:
>> > The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and then
>> > again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me. OK to
>> > apply?
>>
>> Conceptually it is OK but why no
On Jun 20, 2010, at 6:06 AM, Frans Pop wrote:
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
* Otavio Salvador [2010-06-19 12:35]:
The following patch, which clears the cache after debootstrap and
then again at the end (after kernel/extra packages), works for me.
OK to apply?
Conceptuall
[Otavio Salvador]
> It looks it will need to be optional otherwise this is going to break
> Debian EDU.
>
> But I see your point in doing it twice :)
One setup that would not break Debian Edu is to clean the apt cache
once just after debootstrap, as bind-mounting the apt cache is only
done after
On Sunday 20 June 2010, Rick Thomas wrote:
> If you are *very* short of disk space, doing it twice might make sense.
Nonsense. If you're that short on diskspace you have a totally unusable
system anyway.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "
Hello Frans,
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Sunday 20 June 2010, Rick Thomas wrote:
>> If you are *very* short of disk space, doing it twice might make sense.
>
> Nonsense. If you're that short on diskspace you have a totally unusable
> system anyway.
Not really; 80 or 9
Hello,
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> One setup that would not break Debian Edu is to clean the apt cache
> once just after debootstrap, as bind-mounting the apt cache is only
> done after debootstrap is done when building the LTSP chroot. The
> reason is simply t
[Otavio Salvador]
> So it being done at base-installer time would not hurt you, indeed.
Yes, assuming it is done right after debootstrap, and before the extra
packages (like the kernel) is done. The extra packages will be useful
to cache for the LTSP chroot building.
> Then basically it could b
Hello,
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 5:56 AM, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Because of this, I would prefer to leave the complete APT cache in
> place until the end of the installation, at least in the common case.
>
> What about only purging the apt cache if there is little space on the
> disk or littl
21 matches
Mail list logo
