| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
A look at package repository proxiesA look at package repository proxiesPosted Feb 13, 2009 23:51 UTC (Fri) by snore (subscriber, #43276)In reply to: A look at package repository proxies by johill Parent article: A look at package repository proxies
Indeed, apt-zeroconf seems like the most hassle free of all, especially for home setups where security doesn't really matter. In a server environment I ended up going for a mdns-repository (ubuntu.local) served by two hosts. This required a avahi hack (adding a cname to myhostname.local) but it certainly works. Both servers had a complete ubuntu repository. The fact that a full repository is only 200 something gb, and that the dutch ubuntu-mirror was on the same switch kinda helped.
(Log in to post comments)
A look at package repository proxies Posted Feb 14, 2009 20:29 UTC (Sat) by johill (subscriber, #25196) [Link]
As far as I know apt-zeroconf doesn't really affect security at all -- you still download package lists from the server and then verify the package signatures anyway, so a rogue apt-zeroconf 'cache' wouldn't do any damage unless you were ignoring package signature failures.
But if the other version works good for you by all means use it! I just have a bunch of machines that are mostly off and I don't care about downloading more when the alternative would be to walk over to another house and switch on a computer ;)
|
|
||||||||||||