Archives
Archives
| From: | Stroller <stroller@××××××××××××××××××.uk> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@××××××××××××.org | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an alternative portage tree sync method | ||
| Date: | Tue, 22 Mar 2005 15:03:28 | ||
| Message-Id: | 6c375f1155334d13f378e8c9130bb710@stellar.eclipse.co.uk | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for an alternative portage tree sync method by Simon Stelling |
||
| 1 | On Mar 22, 2005, at 3:03 pm, Simon Stelling wrote: |
| 2 | > |
| 3 | > And where is the benefit beside mirrors don't need to have a running |
| 4 | > rsync? If it uses exactly the same algorithm for finding the |
| 5 | > differences, users won't download less. |
| 6 | |
| 7 | As I read the article, it's more firewall-friendly, allowing fetches |
| 8 | over port 80. |
| 9 | |
| 10 | Stroller. |
| 11 | |
| 12 | -- |
| 13 | gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |