Archives
Archives
| From: | Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-user@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-user] An alternative to http-replicator | ||
| Date: | Sun, 11 Jun 2006 00:44:34 | ||
| Message-Id: | 358eca8f0606100325q77cbdc4coa53461c1fd3b8db1@mail.gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-user] An alternative to http-replicator by "Michael Weyershäuser" |
||
| 1 | On 10/06/06, Michael Weyershäuser <thedude0001@×××.de> wrote: |
| 2 | > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 3 | > Hash: SHA1 |
| 4 | > |
| 5 | > Jeremy Olexa wrote: |
| 6 | > > |
| 7 | > > Much simplier: |
| 8 | > > http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Using_a_shared_portage_via_NFS |
| 9 | > |
| 10 | > I have used that setup for some time and must say that sharing |
| 11 | > portage over NFS is slow like hell... |
| 12 | |
| 13 | What's the pros/cons of mounting portage over NFS Vs http-replicator? |
| 14 | -- |
| 15 | Regards, |
| 16 | Mick |
| 17 | |
| 18 | -- |
| 19 | gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-user] An alternative to http-replicator | Bob Sanders <rmsand@××××××××××.net> |