On Mon, 8 January 2001 04:15:10 +0100, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > method will result in the immediate termination of public rsync
> > access to our servers.
>
> I think that is something to be discussed. As I said before, I expect
> the rsync + some features to produce less load than ft
On 8 Jan 2001, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > The short answer is exactly what you should expect - No,
> > absolutely not. Any emergence of a general rsync for APT
>
> Then why did it take so long? :)
I was traveling.
> > method will result in the immediate termination of public
n
>> answere back yet.
> No, you are just rediculously impatatient.
> Date: 06 Jan 2001 19:26:59 +0100 Subject: rsync support for apt
> Date: 07 Jan 2001 22:42:02 +0100 Subject: apt maintainers dead?
> Just a bit over 24 hours? Tsk Tsk.
Usually with people
On 8 Jan 2001, Brian May wrote:
> Do you know when they plan to integrate rproxy support into programs
> like squid, apache and Mozilla (as per their web site)?
No, I do not follow that closely. What we need to see is an apache module
primarily. There are also some (IMHO) serious issues with abo
> "Jason" == Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jason> I have had discussions with the rproxy folks, and I feel
Jason> that they are currently the best hope for this sort of
Jason> thing. If you want to do something, then help them.
As I suspected...
Do you know when the
upport for apt
Date: 07 Jan 2001 22:42:02 +0100
Subject: apt maintainers dead?
Just a bit over 24 hours? Tsk Tsk.
The short answer is exactly what you should expect - No, absolutely not.
Any emergence of a general rsync for APT method will result in the
immediate termination of public rsync
Hi,
I tried to contact the apt maintainers about rsync support for
apt-get (a proof of concept was included) but haven't got an answere
back yet.
Is the whole team on vacation? Who is actually on that list?
>From the number of bugs open against apt-get I would think they are
all dead. Please pro
7 matches
Mail list logo
