On Wednesday 05 October 2016 at 20:40:46, Hardik Dangar wrote:
> Hey Jok,
>
> Thanks for the suggetion but the big issue with that is i have to download
> whole repository about ( 80-120 GB ) first and then each week i need to
> download 20 to 25 GB.
This is not true for apt-cacher-ng. You install it and it does nothing. You
point your Debian (or Ubuntu, maybe other Debian-derived distros as well, I
haven't tested) machines at it as their APT proxy, and it then caches content
as it gets requested and downloaded. Each machine which requests a new
package causes that package to get cached. Each machine which requests a
cached package gets the local copy (unless it's been updated, in which case
the cache gets updated).
> We hardly use any of that except few popular repos.
> big issue i always have with most of them is third party repo's.
> squid-deb-proxy is quite reliable but again its squid with custom config
> nothing else and it fails to cache google debs.
>
> Squid is perfect for me because it can cache things which is requested
> first time. So next time anybody requests it it's ready.
This is exactly how apt-cacher-ng works. I use it myself and I would
recommend you investigate it further for this purpose.
> The problem lies when big companies like google and github does not wants us
> to cache their content and puts various tricks so we can't do that.
That's a strange concept for a Debian repository (even third-party).
Are you sure you're talking about repositories and not just isolated .deb
files?
Antony.
--
A user interface is like a joke.
If you have to explain it, it didn't work.
Please reply to the list;
please *don't* CC me.
_______________________________________________
squid-users mailing list
squid-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-users
