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

Matthew Morgan wrote:
> 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?
>

I've just ported that header fix down to 3.1. Try tomorrows snapshot and
see if the header change fixes the issue at all.
If the problem remains, then yes a copy of the 2.7 transactions would be
useful to compare.

Amos

-- 
Please be using
   Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE7 or 3.0.STABLE20
   Current Beta Squid 3.1.0.14