| 1 |
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 02:47:45PM +0300, Amit Dor-Shifer wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi. |
| 3 |
> Looking at getbinpkg.py, I see that BINPKGs can be retrieved using |
| 4 |
> http/s s/ftp. I'm wondering about rsync, as it is mostly supported |
| 5 |
> across portage (and also in layman). Is there some design reasoning |
| 6 |
> behind this lack of support, or is it that no-one has yet gotten around |
| 7 |
> to implement it? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I'm raising the question because I'm implementing a private repository |
| 10 |
> and would prefer not to service it via http if I don't have to. Right |
| 11 |
> now, the only feature which is blocking me is this lack of support for |
| 12 |
> binary packages. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Look in the code to be sure, but I'd expect it just hasn't been |
| 15 |
implemented. If I were in your shoes, I'd generalize the SYNC proto |
| 16 |
support into something usable for binpkgs also- I did this in pkgcore, |
| 17 |
works fairly well (and could be extended to fetching in general, which |
| 18 |
again works well enough). |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Personally, I wouldn't dick around with rsync for individual file |
| 21 |
transfers- http/ftp seems better suited, but I may be missing |
| 22 |
something about your setup that warrants it. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Cheers- |
| 25 |
~harring |
Archives