Re: [gentoo-dev] Use of "nomirror" flag

[Mike]

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:25:33 -0700, Robin H. Johnson <robbat2@g.o> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 09:13:37PM +0000, Kurt Lieber wrote:
>
>
> > On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 01:37:27PM -0700 or thereabouts, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 11:21:18AM -0500, Corey Shields wrote:
> > > > Keep in mind that anytime you set this flag on a package, people who
> > > > rely on a distfile mirror as their only source of Gentoo packages will
> > > > not get the package.  This is common in many cases where Gentoo is being
> > > > used inside a private network that utilizes a local distfile mirror on
> > > > the inside of that network.
> > > This is incorrect. They should be using a 'local' entry in
> > > /etc/portage/mirrors in such a configuration, as it does get checked
> > > even when RESTRICT="nomirror" is in place.
> > Are you saying that putting "local" in /etc/portage/mirrors overrides the
> > 'nomirror' flag?  If so, great (though that opens up some other
> > concerns...).  If not, then Corey's original point still stands.  Use of
> > nomirror prevents people from establishing their own local mirrors of
> > files.
> Yes, it does override the nomirror flag [see portage(5)].
>
> I use it to great effect to administer a large number of Gentoo servers
> at work. Not having to download the Sun JDK multiple times is a great
> boon - just download once, and place it on my private mirror.
>

I prefer using an NFS mounted /usr/portage myself. Everything shares
/usr/portage/distfiles, so packages are only downloaded once. Plus,
this lets me only need to update the portage tree on a single machine,
which when you're forced by firewall rules to use emerge-webrsync,
saves quite a bit of bandwidth.

Mike

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list