On Mon, September 22, 2008 08:11, Kel Modderman wrote: > On Monday 22 September 2008 15:20:20 Cameron Dale wrote: > >> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 10:14 PM, Thomas Goirand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> We've been using apt-proxy for about a year, and then found it quite >>> buggy. So we moved to using apt-cacher. Now we have loads of problems >>> with apt-cacher as well (like currently, a recurring tzdata size >>> mismatch error). I was wondering if approx is any better than the >>> other two. Did any of you try? >> >> I have also experienced similar problems with both apt-proxy and >> -cacher. I am now using approx, and I can report no errors with it at >> all. It may be slightly slower, but that could be my imagination. I would >> definitely recommend approx. > > I agree, approx has served myself well for quite some time.
I had some caching issues with approx in etch. When I upgraded to the version from lenny in backports.org, that trouble went away and it runs smoothly. Just as a note there seems to be now a fourth alternative: apt-cacher-ng... Thijs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
