package downloads

Joachim Beckers jbeckers at
Sun Mar 20 04:27:02 PST 2005


Found this in an older thread:

Bruce Dubbs wrote:

 > Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
 >> As it stands right now, we haven't even changed the main LFS profile 
to do auto-download from, and the load 
generated by that will be lower than the BLFS load on anduin (there are 
a lot fewer packages, and not so many large ones). I guess someone needs 
to make a policy decision as to whether the profiles in general should 
be distributed this way :-)
 > I'd like you guys to hold off automating downloads from anduin where 
you can for the present.  However, if there is a problem package or two, 
by all means, use it.
 > After the site becomes reasonably well known, I would like to monitor 
the bandwidth usage for a while to see if it casues problems with the 
ISP.  I'm not expecting problems, but I don't want to spike the usage 
too early.

Is there still any objection against changing the download urls in the 
blfs profile to use anduin?
Currently there are a lot of dead links in our url-lists (and apart from 
those dead links, it also seems that is down) and that 
should really be fixed before we release the profile.


More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list