Bug List: (This bug is not in your last search results)   Show last search results      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 6213
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: Daniel Robbins (RETIRED) <drobbins@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: António Meireles <am@epandemic.com>
Add CC:
CC:
Remove selected CCs
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 6213 depends on: 4874 Show dependency tree
Bug 6213 blocks:
Votes: 0    Show votes for this bug    Vote for this bug

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)


Not eligible to see or edit group visibility for this bug.






View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug


Description:   Opened: 2002-08-08 12:45 0000
due, probably, to the (deserverd) increase in popularity of gentoo, the rsync
mirrors are suffering to answer to alll the load. 

One side effect of this is slower updates of the rsyncm mirrors from thr main tree. 

Since recently  portage by default does an emerge --clean at startup if i first
went to a *more* upddated rsync mirror and latter to a slower one (in terms of
syncing to the main cvs tree) the changes that were gotten from the first emerge
will be erased in the second one  (regetting an older tree) . 

I think that an usefull feature could be (like the md5 sigs) have a *timestamp*
signature per file and independent of rsync; this way portage could know if it
is walking *back* in time or not ...

keep the good work 

thanxs in advance, 


just my .2 euros ...

------- Comment #1 From SpanKY 2002-08-08 14:01:59 0000 -------

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 4874 ***

------- Comment #2 From António Meireles 2002-08-08 14:13:59 0000 -------
if you read bellow the third paragraph you'll see that i  'm going far away
than
the bug you say i 'm duplicating (i 'm not talking alone  about rsync
congestion
- i 'm talking about rsync *time-warps* )... Yep i even *sugest*  a feature
improvement ...

TIA 

------- Comment #3 From SpanKY 2002-08-08 17:04:24 0000 -------
so than this bug report turns into a request for enhancement ;)

------- Comment #4 From Nicholas Jones (RETIRED) 2002-10-12 15:46:36 0000 -------
This isn't really possible with rsync.
There are too many factors to deal with.

And you shouldn't run into this issue if you only rsync once
every hour max. Otherwise you tax the servers.

Bug List: (This bug is not in your last search results)   Show last search results      Search page      Enter new bug