From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RPHyk-0007o9-JW for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:06:58 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9D24B21C06F; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:06:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 361D321C04D for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:05:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B21DB1B4029 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:05:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.77 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.77 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-1.278, BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.504, T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL=0.01] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DLdEYwsu-TU3 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:05:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 854541B4025 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:05:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RPHx5-0006cK-7j for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 19:05:15 +0100 Received: from p5086d3d0.dip.t-dialin.net ([80.134.211.208]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 19:05:15 +0100 Received: from holger.hoffstaette by p5086d3d0.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 19:05:15 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: "Holger Hoffstaette" Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: The LIGHTEST web server (just for serving files)? Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 18:05:36 +0100 Organization: The Fists of the White Lotus Message-ID: References: <4EBE38F3.2000005@binarywings.net> <201111121155.41045.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <4EBE7139.5000504@binarywings.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: p5086d3d0.dip.t-dialin.net User-Agent: Pan/0.13.91 (Before we let euphoria convince us we are free) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: a3f1d303-5b72-4ac0-9856-534de1ff6e82 X-Archives-Hash: 30a9d766ba0a9d10ddd6d695982ace09 On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 14:14:33 +0100, Florian Philipp wrote: > Disadvantages? I'm unsure how portage will handle cases when two > machines fetch the same file at the same time. In my experience concurrent/overlapping fetches work just fine, thanks to portage's lock file. The second potential downloader just waits or does something else in the meantime. -h