On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 02:09:26PM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote: > squid cache server is easier for me to set up. Then use it ;-) If you've already got Squid set up nicely, then obviously it is less effort to point Apt at Squid than to install apt-proxy. apt-proxy is quite different to Squid, because it knows about the contents of Debian archives and builds and maintains a partial mirror. > and no need to reconfigure even if you fetch from other > sources. FUD :) If you have 10 clients and change your Debian mirror, you have to edit /etc/apt/sources.list on all 10 clients if you use squid. With apt-proxy, you only have to modifiy one file (/etc/apt-proxy/apt-proxy.conf) on one machine. I guess you were maybe referring to the operation of adding a new apt backend to your sources.list, e.g. Blackdown Java. With Squid, you add a single line to sources.list on each client, and with apt-proxy you also have to add an extra line to apt-proxy.conf. Chris -- Chris Halls | Frankfurt, Germany
Attachment:
pgpHzH2O8cgNB.pgp
Description: PGP signature