[pacman-dev] slower ftp access with pacman 3 ?

Mateusz Jedrasik m.jedrasik at gmail.com
Tue May 8 14:09:06 EDT 2007

Tuesday 08 of May 2007 20:00:26 Xavier napisał(a):
> 2007/5/8, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com>:
> > That one is problematic and is due to the symlinking on the servers.
> > There's no way to know what it should do because 'PWD' returns the
> > wrong directory.
> yes, I was just wondering if it was possible to detect symlinks, but I
> don't think ftp allows this.
> > Ideally we need to fix the ftp setup on the main servers and the
> > mirrors though (0.8 should be a symlink to current, not the other way
> > around).  But you could try using the 0.8 path in your mirror config
> > and see if that helps.
> I don't know, I find it more logical to have current pointing to the
> current version.
> Having it the other way around would indeed solve the problem, but I
> find it a bit odd.
> Using 0.8 in the config directly indeed works, since it's a real directory.
> Anyway, this problem only occurs when downloading several packages from
> current. For syncing, it has to change path for each repo (current, then
> extra, then ...), so there is another problem. Did the ftp code change a
> lot between pacman 2 and pacman 3?
> Also, why is ftp used by default for all mirrors, even though many are
> available through both protocols. What's wrong with http? It has much
> faster access, but maybe also some obvious downsides I don't know
> about?
> _______________________________________________
> pacman-dev mailing list
> pacman-dev at archlinux.org
> http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev

There isn't any, as far as I know really. One could probably argue how http 
was overhead or didn't incorporate the similar solutions ftp could give off 
for anonymous file access, but frankly, those days are slightly over and ftp 
remains the incredibly broken by design protocol.

That's what I heard at least - really, can't say that I mind either. I guess 
tho the recommended way would be using ftp, if not for anything else, than 
for proper (? quotation needed) QoS markings on firewalls/routers.

Btw, I really can't say I find pacman3 slow... well, the tests do speak the 
truth and ofcourse if anywhere there could be an improvement made, I say go 
for it with my blessings - just a 'feel' however that it's pretty fast as 
is ;)



Mateusz Jędrasik <m.jedrasik at gmail.com>
tel. +48(51)69-444-90, +44(772)664-2342

More information about the pacman-dev mailing list