On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 09:34 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > On 1/17/07, seth vidal <skvidal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 09:29 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > On 1/17/07, Warren Togami <wtogami@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > 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. > > > > > > Does anyone track how many updates are released / day? I should start > > > tracking that, I bet its significant. > > > > > > > If you're willing to work with per-day granularity - you can do it with > > repoquery. Just compare the changes in 'updates-released' from one day > > to the next. > > > > Keep in mind the package doesn't always go up. Sometimes old pkgs get > > removed. So it could remain the same number but new pkgs are released. > > > > -sv > > i think a lot of this has been discussed before in Fedora. Anyone > know of any threads we can point Ahmed at? Looks like there's a lot > of work to be done :-D The first thread I'm aware of was in 1998 and involved xdelta'ing the rpm's. Google can't locate it so I'm betting it was on contrib-list (whose archives have disappeared from redhat.com) Some of the more recent discussions:: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2005-December/msg00404.html http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2005-June/msg00018.html ... and google knows of others as well. Try:: site:redhat.com delta rpm -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
