On Wednesday 17 January 2007 09:26, Warren Togami wrote: > Dennis Gilmore wrote: > > On Saturday 13 January 2007 12:40 pm, Ahmed Kamal wrote: > >> FYI, this yum deltarpm support, is based on that same deltarpm package > >> that is made by suse. This suse package can create new rpms from drpm + > >> (either ondisk files, or old rpm). Either way, a new rpm is created, > >> then installed. Never does it replace files directly. Not sure why this > >> would be bad security wise > > > > I personally don't like the idea of binary delta's there are too many > > variables with them and too much overhead. for instance say we update > > cups 4 times during the life of a release. that means we need to create > > 4 delta's as the end user can have 4 possible states of the package. > > Then limit the delta to the most common update paths. If the desired > delta doesn't exist when the user tries, it can fall back to download > the full RPM. No big loss. i could see for OOo the need and maybe firefox but that is really about it. X in the old days but no now. If the user is not really wanting to update because of to many updates chances are that they dont have the latest versions installed. Im not saying that we should not do it. Just that personally im not a fan, and I dont think the gains will be worth the pain. Please prove me wrong if i am. -- ,-._|\ Dennis Gilmore, RHCE /Aussie\ Proud Australian \_.--._/ | Aurora | Fedora | v
