>
> On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Mike wrote:
>
> > > 2.) Writeing a few scripts they can update a local copy of all description
> > > files by downloading the newest version and building a website from
> > > the description files.
> >
> > Is there any particular reason for downloading them all locally rather
> > than just looking at the original site?
>
> Locally is ment as on the server of the patches archive. Remote in this
> meaning would be on the site of the maintainer of this patch. The idea
> is that the maintainer only needs to update the description file on
> his download page - the server which holds the patch archive updates his
> copies automatically (lets say every 4 hours - this files are not big).
>
Ah, OK. I was misunderstanding you. Maybe the patch maintainer could
have some way of triggering the script to be run whenever he updates
something? Checking all the patches every 4 hours would presumeably
generate a significant amount of unneeded traffic, and might there be
problems if servers go down?
> > > We all prefer the mirrors, aren't we?
> > Not always. My nearest mirror is often 2-3 days late getting kernels, and
> > I don't like waiting that long :)
>
> Well - I'm in austria. The local mirror here is ftp.tu-wien.ac.at and it's
> pretty up-to-date. The only thing I donwnload directly from kernel.org are
> the pre-patches becouse they are not mirrored at my site.
>
I get linux-kernel-patch, and most of the time that is all I need. But
when patches are too big so they don't get sent out I need to download
them. 2.1.124 I downloaded straight from kernel.org less than 30mins
after it appeared there, and kernel.org was plenty fast enough (it
downloaded in the time it took me to scan through the patch summary
thingy).
-- Mike <rickettm@ox.compsoc.net>"You know, we've won awards for this crap." -- David Letterman
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/