| 1 |
On 04/26/2012 01:03 AM, Corentin Chary wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 04/26/2012 12:30 AM, Corentin Chary wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>>> On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:16:05 +0200 |
| 6 |
>>>> Corentin Chary <corentin.chary@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 7 |
>>>> |
| 8 |
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> |
| 9 |
>>>>> wrote: |
| 10 |
>>>>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:19:11 +0000 |
| 11 |
>>>>>> "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o> wrote: |
| 12 |
>>>>>> |
| 13 |
>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 04:50:49PM +0200, Corentin Chary wrote: |
| 14 |
>>>>>>>>>> $ ./mirrors.py --all --count |
| 15 |
>>>>>>>>>> 297 ?? ?? http://pear.php.net |
| 16 |
>>>>>>>>>> 297 ?? ?? http://pear.php.net/get |
| 17 |
>>>>>>>>>> 88 ?? ?? ??http://pecl.php.net |
| 18 |
>>>>>>>>>> 88 ?? ?? ??http://pecl.php.net/get |
| 19 |
>>>>>>>>> These are already mirror bouncers. If you visit the above, |
| 20 |
>>>>>>>>> you'll get the closest mirror for downloading. |
| 21 |
>>>>>>>> And since there is already ~10 "mirrors" with only one actual |
| 22 |
>>>>>>>> backend, should they go to thirdpartymirrors or not ? If not, |
| 23 |
>>>>>>>> what about this pseudo-mirrors already present in |
| 24 |
>>>>>>>> thirdpartymirrors ? |
| 25 |
>>>>>>> I think we should add the pseudo-mirrors, but explicitly mark them |
| 26 |
>>>>>>> as such in the file, so that they don't get duplicate entries |
| 27 |
>>>>>>> added (eg adding us.pear, de.pear and the pear bouncer is bad. |
| 28 |
>>>>>>> Should have just the bouncer). |
| 29 |
>>>>>> |
| 30 |
>>>>>> It'd be great if we could add some kind of additional mirror |
| 31 |
>>>>>> entries, which would be used by repoman to signal missing mirror:// |
| 32 |
>>>>>> entries but won't be used for downloads. |
| 33 |
>>>>> |
| 34 |
>>>>> Yep, we could put that in it too: |
| 35 |
>>>>> github http://github.com/downloads/ |
| 36 |
>>>>> https://github.com/downloads/ |
| 37 |
>>>> |
| 38 |
>>>> Per spec, portage can choose a random mirror of the list. If we put |
| 39 |
>>>> entries like that, these two will be equally possible as the preferred |
| 40 |
>>>> cloud. URL -- while they redirect one to another. |
| 41 |
>>>> |
| 42 |
>>>> We might decide on some common syntax like preceding all extra entries |
| 43 |
>>>> with '-' but I don't want to be the one deciding here. |
| 44 |
>>> |
| 45 |
>>> I checked, and current portage code already handle entries starting |
| 46 |
>>> with a - gracefully thanks to stack_dictlist (removing them from the |
| 47 |
>>> list of mirrors). |
| 48 |
>> |
| 49 |
>> That means repoman will ignore them too. If you want existing versions |
| 50 |
>> of repoman to check for those paths in SRC_URI, you can add a line like |
| 51 |
>> this to thirdpartymirrors: |
| 52 |
>> |
| 53 |
>> github-bad-urls http://github.com/downloads/ https://github.com/downloads/ |
| 54 |
> |
| 55 |
> Hum, I checked repoman source code, and I didn't find where it checks |
| 56 |
> if SRC_URI matches something in thirdpartymirror. Any hint ? |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
Search for SRC_URI.mirror in /usr/bin/repoman. |
| 59 |
-- |
| 60 |
Thanks, |
| 61 |
Zac |
Archives