<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The HyRax Macrocosm &#187; Hardy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.serenux.com/tag/hardy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.serenux.com</link>
	<description>Life, the Universe and Ubuntu.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Aug 2010 21:35:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Ubuntu vs Vista Resource Usage</title>
		<link>http://www.serenux.com/2008/10/ubuntu-vs-vista-resource-usage/</link>
		<comments>http://www.serenux.com/2008/10/ubuntu-vs-vista-resource-usage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 12:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>HyRax</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Misc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intrepid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ubuntu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.serenux.com/?p=105</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Everyone always rambles on about how much of a resource hog Windows Vista is compared to Linux, so I figured why not find out exactly how much of a hog it really is? For this comparison, I have pitted the following versions of Ubuntu and Vista against each other: Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate with Service [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Everyone always rambles on about how much of a resource hog Windows Vista is compared to Linux, so I figured why not find out exactly how much of a hog it really is?</p>
<p>For this comparison, I have pitted the following versions of Ubuntu and Vista against each other:</p>
<ul>
<li>Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate with Service Pack 1 and all system updates to 29th October 2008</li>
<li>Ubuntu Linux 8.04.1 Hardy Heron with all system updates to 29th October 2008</li>
<li>Ubuntu Linux 8.10 Intrepid Ibex Release Candidate with all system updates to 29th October 2008 (just for kicks)</li>
</ul>
<p>The tests would be simple. A fresh vanilla install of Ubuntu and Vista doing four of the most common things a typical user might do everyday:</p>
<ol>
<li>Nothing</li>
<li>View a web page</li>
<li>Listen to an MP3 music track</li>
<li>Play Solitaire</li>
</ol>
<p><span id="more-105"></span></p>
<p>To keep things as fair as possible, I used <a title="Sun Microsystems xVM Virtualbox homepage" href="http://www.virtualbox.org" target="_blank">Virtualbox</a> 2.0.4 and created three VM&#8217;s each sporting 1GB RAM, 32MB video RAM and an 8GB HDD file each, except for Vista which needed more HDD estate, so it got a 20GB HDD file instead (this is not boding well for Vista already!).</p>
<p>The Ubuntu installs each had a 512MB swap partition created while Vista went ahead and stormed in with an automatically-created 2GB swap file. Shouldn&#8217;t be an issue as the tests are not going to tax the OS&#8217; anyway.</p>
<p>All installed OS&#8217; are the 32-bit versions. All had the Virtualbox Guest Additions drivers added, but since these drivers do not support acceleration, OpenGL and DirectX eye-candy (such as Compiz in Ubuntu and Aero in Vista) were automatically disabled by the system.</p>
<p>The host hardware for the VM&#8217;s is an Intel Quad-core Q9450 based machine with 8GB RAM running the 64-bit version of Ubuntu 8.04.1 Hardy Heron.</p>
<h3><strong>Installed Disk Usage</strong></h3>
<p>So let&#8217;s start with the simple stuff  &#8211; how much disk space does a vanilla install of each OS chew up? The following table shows a completely stock installation of each OS, including subsequently downloaded update files:</p>
<table style="text-align: left; height: 64px;" border="0" width="364">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Vista Ultimate SP1</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">11.9GB (!!)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ubuntu 8.04.1 Hardy</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">2.7GB</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid RC</td>
<td style="text-align: left;">2.3GB</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Ubuntu has been dubbed by some to be the &#8220;Windows&#8221; of Linux distros in terms of its overall weight, but it&#8217;s anorexic compared to Vista. Why does any OS need over 10GB of disk space just for itself? Consider also that Ubuntu&#8217;s installed space also includes a full office suite &#8211; not even Vista has that, yet it&#8217;s so much bigger.</p>
<p>It was interesting to note that Ubuntu Intrepid consumed a whole 400MB less disk space than Ubuntu Hardy, however part of this could be attributed to possibly less extra update files downloaded compared to Hardy. In any case, both are well under 5GB, let alone 10GB!</p>
<p>So far one point to Linux and a big fat zero to Vista.</p>
<h3><strong>Idle RAM Usage</strong></h3>
<p>With disk usage now established, how does the RAM stack up? Each desktop was at its standard setup with standard wallpaper, panels, widgets, etc and only the resource manager window on-screen:</p>
<table style="text-align: center; height: 399px;" border="0" width="508">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Vista SP1</td>
<td>411MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/vistaidleresources.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-thumbnail wp-image-101" title="Vista Idle Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/vistaidleresources.jpg" alt="" width="135" height="150" /></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ubuntu 8.04.1 Hardy</td>
<td>122MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hardyidleresources.png"><img class="aligncenter size-thumbnail wp-image-91" title="Ubuntu Hardy Idle Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hardyidleresources.png" alt="" width="150" height="114" /></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid RC</td>
<td>142MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/intrepididleresources.png"><img class="aligncenter size-thumbnail wp-image-97" title="Ubuntu Intrepid Idle Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/intrepididleresources.png" alt="" width="150" height="113" /></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Another win for Ubuntu by a good 250MB. Also, again a surprise showing by Intrepid that despite the smaller HDD footprint, its resource usage was 20MB greater than Hardy, but what was alarming was that Vista was already using 387MB of its 2GB swap file while both Ubuntu installations had not touched theirs&#8230;!</p>
<p>Two points for Ubuntu, none for Vista.</p>
<h3><strong>Browsing a Common Web Site</strong></h3>
<p>Now to up the ante &#8211; all three installations now used their default web browser (Firefox 3.0.3 for Ubuntu, Internet Exploiter, uh, Explorer 7.0.6 for Vista) to view a common website containing Flash, animated GIFs, lots of frames, blocks of formatted text and graphics &#8211; the <a title="The Sydney Morning Herald Homepage" href="http://www.smh.com.au" target="_blank">Sydney Morning Herald</a> homepage.</p>
<p>All three OS&#8217; do not have Flash installed as standard and thus did not play any of the Flash content, however the rest of the page did load and render successfully.</p>
<p>The memory usage now stands at:</p>
<table style="text-align: center; height: 399px;" border="0" width="512">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Vista SP1</td>
<td>490MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/vistawebpageresources.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-thumbnail wp-image-104" title="Vista Webpage Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/vistawebpageresources.jpg" alt="" width="135" height="150" /></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ubuntu 8.04.1 Hardy</td>
<td>179MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hardywebpageresources.png"><img class="aligncenter size-thumbnail wp-image-94" title="Ubuntu Hardy Webpage Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hardywebpageresources.png" alt="" width="150" height="114" /></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid RC</td>
<td>198MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/intrepidwebpageresources.png"><img class="aligncenter size-thumbnail wp-image-100" title="Ubuntu Intrepid Webpage Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/intrepidwebpageresources.png" alt="" width="150" height="113" /></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>A notable jump by all three candidates in this case, as one might expect, though while Ubuntu jumped up some 55MB, Vista jumped up an extra 80MB.</p>
<p>Curiously, Vista&#8217;s CPU usage jumped up and down a lot while the site sat idle and the spike of usage you see at the end of the graph is when the site automatically refreshed itself. No such major jumps from Ubuntu.</p>
<p>Another point for Ubuntu for a total of three. Vista is yet to score.</p>
<h3><strong>Listening to an MP3 Music Track</strong></h3>
<p>Browsing any website would just not be fun without some background music. Using the default music player (Totem 2.22.1 and 2.24.2 for Ubuntu Hardy and Intrepid respectively, Windows Media Player 11 for Vista), I perused the SMH website (without clicking on any new links) and listened to the same 3.3MB MP3 music track for 1 minute to allow memory usage to level out.</p>
<table style="text-align: center; height: 399px;" border="0" width="512">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Vista SP1</td>
<td>560MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/vistamp3resources.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-thumbnail wp-image-102" title="Vista MP3 Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/vistamp3resources.jpg" alt="" width="135" height="150" /></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ubuntu 8.04.1 Hardy</td>
<td>211MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hardymp3resources.png"><img class="alignnone size-thumbnail wp-image-92" title="Ubuntu Hardy MP3 Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hardymp3resources.png" alt="" width="150" height="114" /></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid RC</td>
<td>237MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/intrepidmp3resources.png"><img class="alignnone size-thumbnail wp-image-98" title="Intrepid MP3 Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/intrepidmp3resources.png" alt="" width="150" height="113" /></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Memory usage has increased by nearly 40MB on Ubuntu but by 70MB on Vista. This is not really too surprising given the heavyweight that is Media Player versus the simpler Totem, though Totem did prompt me to download and install the GStreamer Extras MP3 codec, so there&#8217;s extra memory usage there too.</p>
<p>The observant among you might say that it would be a fairer comparison to compare Windows Media Player with Rhythmbox, however I decided to go with whatever launched as the default MP3 player and at the end of the day, all that matters is that I can hear my music and Ubuntu has delivered 30MB ahead here.</p>
<p>Four points for Ubuntu, still none for Vista.</p>
<h3><strong>Playing Solitaire</strong></h3>
<p>Surfing the &#8216;net is hard work and what better way to unwind than with a relaxing game of Solitaire. In this test, I played Solitaire for two minutes whilst listening to my MP3 track and leaving the web browser open with our self-refreshing homepage.</p>
<table style="text-align: center; height: 399px;" border="0" width="516">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Vista SP1</td>
<td>605MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/vistasolitaireresources.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-thumbnail wp-image-103" title="Vista Solitaire Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/vistasolitaireresources.jpg" alt="" width="135" height="150" /></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ubuntu 8.04.1 Hardy</td>
<td>224MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hardysolitaireresources.png"><img class="alignnone size-thumbnail wp-image-93" title="Ubuntu Hardy Solitaire Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hardysolitaireresources.png" alt="" width="150" height="114" /></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid RC</td>
<td>244MB</td>
<td><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/intrepidsolitaireresources.png"><img class="alignnone size-thumbnail wp-image-99" title="Ubuntu Intrepid Solitaire Resource Usage" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/intrepidsolitaireresources.png" alt="" width="150" height="113" /></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Really, Solitaire isn&#8217;t a terribly complex application and Ubuntu&#8217;s Solitaire bears a remarkable resemblance to all the Windows versions&#8230; except Vista which was drastically revamped with extra visual effects, new card textures, etc. No wonder the memory footprint is so much bigger, but a 45MB difference??</p>
<p>Ubuntu Hardy went up 13MB and Intrepid didn&#8217;t even break double-figures with only a 7MB increase.</p>
<p>We could keep testing common applications until the cows come home, but I think it&#8217;s pretty clear that the established pattern is that Microsoft Vista uses up much more memory and disk space on average than Ubuntu Linux.</p>
<p>Probably what was the most worrying here was that Vista&#8217;s swap usage had increased to 692MB and there was an unusually high amount of CPU usage, while both Ubuntu&#8217;s had left their swap on the plate, uneaten.</p>
<p>So the final score is five points for the trim and healthy Ubuntu and still nothing, nada, zip for the obese whale that is Vista.</p>
<h3><strong>Conclusion</strong></h3>
<p>I think some people might say all I&#8217;ve done is confirm what everyone already knew, and perhaps that is the case, but it still made for an interesting comparison and certainly highlights that Microsoft need to do some serious fat trimming.</p>
<p>For those that are interested, the host machine used up a total of 4GB RAM to run all three VM&#8217;s simultaneously plus a bunch of other apps that I had running at the time of testing, and it only nibbled at 44MB of swap. <img src='http://www.serenux.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hostsystem.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-96" title="Host System Thumbnail" src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/hostsystem_thumb.jpg" alt="" width="510" height="143" /></a><br />
Click for the full-size version &#8211; 681K</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.serenux.com/2008/10/ubuntu-vs-vista-resource-usage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>HowTo: Setup your own local Ubuntu repository mirror.</title>
		<link>http://www.serenux.com/2008/10/howto-setup-your-own-local-ubuntu-repository-mirror/</link>
		<comments>http://www.serenux.com/2008/10/howto-setup-your-own-local-ubuntu-repository-mirror/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:28:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>HyRax</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Tutorials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HowTo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intrepid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Repository]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ubuntu]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.serenux.com/?p=80</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While Ubuntu&#8217;s updates are nowhere near as bad as dealing with Windows updates, it can still be annoying to do a fresh install of Ubuntu and then have to download 300MB&#8217;s worth of updates, especially if you have a slow connection, or perhaps you&#8217;re in a remote location and don&#8217;t have an Internet connection. How [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While Ubuntu&#8217;s updates are nowhere near as bad as dealing with Windows updates, it can still be annoying to do a fresh install of Ubuntu and then have to download 300MB&#8217;s worth of updates, especially if you have a slow connection, or perhaps you&#8217;re in a remote location and don&#8217;t have an Internet connection. How do you update machines then??</p>
<p>Why not setup your own personal local Ubuntu Repository? Here&#8217;s how to make one to use either on a personal web server or carry with you on a portable USB (or similar) hard-drive.</p>
<p><span id="more-80"></span></p>
<p>In this example, we&#8217;re going to make a repository using a great little tool called <strong>apt-mirror</strong> and use it to mirror the 32-bit (x86) and 64-bit (AMD64) versions of Ubuntu 8.04.1 Hardy Heron and 8.10 Intrepid Ibex ONLY from an existing source mirror (thus ignoring any other architectures we&#8217;re not interested in). Our source mirror will be the Australian Ubuntu Mirror at Internode, but you can use any mirror you like.</p>
<ol>
<li>On your Ubuntu desktop or server, get into a terminal and type in the following:<span style="color: #000080;"><br />
</span></p>
<pre><span style="color: #000080;">$ sudo apt-get install apt-mirror</span></pre>
</li>
<li>Once installed, edit the config file with:
<pre><span style="color: #000080;">$ sudo nano /etc/apt/mirror.list
</span></pre>
<p><span style="color: #000080;">.</span>..here&#8217;s my config file that I use on my own file server:</p>
<pre><span style="color: #000080;">############# config ###################
</span><span style="color: #000080;"># set base_path    /var/spool/apt-mirror</span><span style="color: #000080;">
#
# if you change the base path you must create the directories below with write privlages
#
# set mirror_path  $base_path/mirror
# set skel_path    $base_path/skel
# set var_path     $base_path/var
# set cleanscript $var_path/clean.sh
# set defaultarch  &lt;running host architecture&gt;
set nthreads     3
set _tilde 0
############## end config ##############

# Ubuntu 8.04.1 Hardy Heron 32-bit
deb-i386 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy main restricted universe multiverse
deb-i386 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-updates main restricted universe multiverse
deb-i386 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-backports main restricted universe multiverse
deb-i386 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-security main restricted universe multiverse
deb-i386 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-proposed main restricted universe multiverse

# Ubuntu 8.04.1 Hardy Heron 64-bit
deb-amd64 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy main restricted universe multiverse
deb-amd64 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-updates main restricted universe multiverse
deb-amd64 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-backports main restricted universe multiverse
deb-amd64 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-security main restricted universe multiverse
deb-amd64 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-proposed main restricted universe multiverse

# Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid Ibex 32-bit
deb-i386 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu intrepid main restricted universe multiverse
deb-i386 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu intrepid-updates main restricted universe multiverse
deb-i386 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu intrepid-backports main restricted universe multiverse
deb-i386 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu intrepid-security main restricted universe multiverse
deb-i386 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu intrepid-proposed main restricted universe multiverse

# Ubuntu 8.10 Intrepid Ibex 64-bit
deb-amd64 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu intrepid main restricted universe multiverse
deb-amd64 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu intrepid-updates main restricted universe multiverse
deb-amd64 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu intrepid-backports main restricted universe multiverse
deb-amd64 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu intrepid-security main restricted universe multiverse
deb-amd64 http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu intrepid-proposed main restricted universe multiverse

# Ubuntu source
#deb-src http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hardy main restricted universe multiverse
#deb-src http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hardy-updates main restricted universe multiverse
#deb-src http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hardy-backports main restricted universe multiverse
#deb-src http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hardy-security main restricted universe multiverse
#deb-src http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hardy-proposed main restricted universe multiverse

clean http://mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu</span></pre>
</li>
<li>The above config sets you up to download both the 32-bit and 64-bit repos for both Hardy and Intrepid only &#8211; nothing else. If you like, you can also add other repos such as Medibuntu, Virtualbox, etc &#8211; anyone who has a standard Apt repository.Note the commented out deb-src lines. I don&#8217;t use source, but if you want it, just uncomment them and point them to Internode.
<p>If you wish to use a different source mirror, simply substitute the URL as appropriate.</li>
<li>Save and exit. You then kick it off with:
<pre><span style="color: #000080;">$ sudo /usr/bin/apt-mirror</span></pre>
<p>&#8230;and go and order several pizzas, because this will take a good while to finish. To update your repo with anything new since last run, just re-run the apt-mirror command. Alternatively, configure cron to execute the command for you. I have mine set to run at 2am every night.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s my log from this morning&#8217;s run:</p>
<pre><span style="color: #000080;">Downloading 222 index files using 3 threads...
Begin time: Thu Oct 23 02:00:01 2008
[3]... [2]... [1]... [0]...
End time: Thu Oct 23 02:01:27 2008

Proceed indexes: [PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP]

276.4 MiB will be downloaded into archive.
Downloading 111 archive files using 3 threads...
Begin time: Thu Oct 23 02:01:51 2008
[3]... [2]... [1]... [0]...
End time: Thu Oct 23 02:07:16 2008

318.5 MiB in 108 files and 0 directories can be freed.
Run /var/spool/apt-mirror/var/clean.sh for this purpose.</span></pre>
<p>&#8230;which tells me 276.4MB of new files were downloaded and 318.5MB of old files are now redundant and should be deleted. Again, I have a cron job setup to run that advised cleanup script for me.</li>
<li>To view the downloaded files. just go to /var/spool/apt-mirror/mirror and you will see a new directory there called mirror.internode.on.net and within that will be your parent mirror&#8217;s directory structure, in this case, exactly how Internode have their structure setup.<br />
.</li>
<li>Once that&#8217;s all done, just setup a virtual website with Apache to allow you to see the downloaded data via a browser and then on your desktop go:
<pre><span style="color: #000080;">$ sudo nano /etc/apt/sources.list.d/mylocalrepo.list</span></pre>
<p>&#8230;and enter the appropriate URL&#8217;s to your local website (note you can call the custom sources file whatever you want as long as it ends in &#8220;.list&#8221;). If you setup a virtual server called http://localhost and point its root to /var/spool/apt-mirror/mirror/mirror.internode.on.net/ then you would enter the following into your sources.list:</p>
<pre><span style="color: #000080;"># My personal Ubuntu mirror
deb http://localhost/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy main multiverse restricted universe
deb http://localhost/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-backports main multiverse restricted universe
deb http://localhost/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-security main multiverse restricted universe
deb http://localhost/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-updates main multiverse restricted universe</span></pre>
<p>&#8230;OR if you&#8217;re not using a web server, then set it up to use local files instead, eg:</p>
<pre><span style="color: #000080;"># My personal Ubuntu mirror
deb file:/var/spool/apt-mirror/mirror/mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy main multiverse restricted universe
deb file:/var/spool/apt-mirror/mirror/mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-backports main multiverse restricted universe
deb file:/var/spool/apt-mirror/mirror/mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-security main multiverse restricted universe
deb file:/var/spool/apt-mirror/mirror/mirror.internode.on.net/pub/ubuntu/ubuntu hardy-updates main multiverse restricted universe</span></pre>
<p>If you&#8217;re using Intrepid, then change all above references to &#8220;hardy&#8221; with &#8220;intrepid&#8221;.</li>
<li>Don&#8217;t forget to then edit /etc/apt/sources.list and comment out all the standard deb lines out. Additionally, if you don&#8217;t want to use a particular section of the repository, such as Backports or Proposed, comment out that line in your custom mylocalrepo.list too by placing a hash at the start of the line.<br />
.</li>
<li>Save and exit and then update your system with your new repo list with:
<pre><span style="color: #000080;">$ sudo apt-get update</span></pre>
<p>&#8230;and all subsequent updates to your system will now come from your local repository. If you&#8217;re using a 32-bit system, it will automatically use the 32-bit data you downloaded, ditto 64-bit.</li>
<li>Pat yourself on the back. Job well done!</li>
</ol>
<div class='wp_likes' id='wp_likes_post-80'><a class='like' href="javascript:wp_likes.like(80);" title='' ><img src="http://www.serenux.com/wp-content/plugins/wp-likes/images/like.gif" alt='' border='0'/>Like</a><span class='text'></span>
<div class='unlike'><a href="javascript:wp_likes.unlike(80);">Unlike</a></div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.serenux.com/2008/10/howto-setup-your-own-local-ubuntu-repository-mirror/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
