🇬🇧 | 24yo French web dev & tech enthusiast

🇫🇷 | Développeur web Limougeaud de 24 ans passionné par l’informatique

Main fediverse account (Mastodon) : @KaKi87@mamot.fr


Formerly @KaKi87@sh.itjust.works, moved because of Cloudflare.

  • 1 Post
  • 30 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: November 18th, 2023

help-circle

  • I didn’t say it was more secure, I said it’s about the same.

    You said automation breeds laziness (by design, to an extent) and lazy end users tend to shoot themselves in the foot.

    So, my question is : what part of automating download of DEBs from a specific source can be shooting oneself in the foot compared to doing the same thing manually every time ?

    you should legally protect yourself

    The MIT license will take care of that.

    Also, to force the user to accept and acknowledge that the software they are installing using this tool is not verified to be safe is inducing fear and/or guilt, therefore is bad UX, I’m not doing that.



















  • Sorry to ask

    Don’t be. I would love to know that an existing and more experienced program does what mine does.

    I’ve been looking for it myself for a long time before deciding to build it.

    isn’t this basically the same thing as apt-cacher-ng?

    Here’s what I’m reading :

    Apt-Cache-ng is A caching proxy. Specialized for package files from Linux distributors, primarily for Debian (and Debian based) distributions but not limited to those.

    A caching proxy have the following benefits:

    • Lower latency
    • Reduce WAN traffic
    • Higher speed for cached contents
    +------------+         +------------+        +------------+
    | Apt Client |  <------+ Apt Cache  | <------+ Apt Mirror |
    +------------+         +------------+        +------------+
    

    So, not the same thing.

    It locally mirrors existing repositories containing existing packages, it doesn’t locally create a new repository for new packages from standalone DEBs.