Re: [squid-users] Re: ubuntu apt-get update 404

Amos Jeffries wrote:
> Matthew Morgan wrote:
>> Amos Jeffries wrote:
>>> Matthew Morgan wrote:
> <snip>
>>>> Ok, it seems to happen in stages. The first time I run apt-get
>>>> update after switching to 3.x, it's hit or miss. Sometimes it's
>>>> perfect, sometimes I get errors. After that, I get errors in two
>>>> stages. Here's what happens:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Either:
>>>>
>>>> apt-get update #1 - no errors
>>>> apt-get update #2 - invalid header, and sometimes 404 errors
>>>> apt-get update #3 and above - 404 errors only
>>>>
>>>> or:
>>>>
>>>> apt-get update #1 - invalid header, and sometimes 404 errors
>>>> apt-get update #2 and above - 404 errors only
>>>>
>>>> The dump files I have uploaded match the second set of
>>>> circumstances. server1.dump and client1.dump are from the first
>>>> apt-get update after switching, and I got an invalid header error +
>>>> 404 errors. server2.dump and client2.dump came from the second
>>>> apt-get update attempt, and only 404 errors were returned.
>>>>
>>>> I hope this helps! Let me know if you need anything else. Just a
>>>> reminder, on my setup I only have 1 squid server with 1 cache
>>>> directory. For comparison, my server is Ubuntu 9.04 running kernel
>>>> 2.6.28-16-server. I am not using TPROXY.
>>>>
>>>> Here are the files (I tried to attach them, but mailer-daemon
>>>> kicked the email)
>>>>
>>>> http://lithagen.dyndns.org/server1.dump
>>>> http://lithagen.dyndns.org/client1.dump
>>>> http://lithagen.dyndns.org/server2.dump
>>>> http://lithagen.dyndns.org/client2.dump
>>>
>>> Well, good news and sad news.
>>>
>>> Both traces show the same problems.
>>>
>>> The 404 is actually being generated by the us.archive.ubuntu.com
>>> server itself. There is something broken at the mirror or in apts
>>> local sources.list URLs.
>> So does squid 3.x have a different user agent string or something?
>
> No.
>
>> Everything works fine with the exact same sources.list when using
>> squid 2.7, so there shouldn't be anything wrong with the file.
>> us.archive.ubuntu.com must be treating squid 3.x different somehow,
>> right?
>
> It does seem to be. Why is the big question.
>
>
> Amos
Should I send you a capture of my working 2.7 installation so you can
compare what headers and such are being sent from an otherwise identical
setup?
Received on Wed Nov 18 2009 - 15:13:46 MST