On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Jon <jdisnard@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I personally tend to agree with Troy. > > We should consider defaulting to disable delta rpm at most, and at > least comment the configs, or make things intelligent. > > For me, it takes longer to process delta rpm files than to download > the actual full rpm, even on high end systems, or low end. > > I suppose in a way this goes back to the flame fest about the package > updater knowing about network conditions. > > * With great network conditions, downloading full rpm might be optimal > to the deltas. > * With poor network conditions, deltas might be nice, but perhaps not > with low end computer. That wasn't about "poor" as in slow vs. "great" as in fast but bandwith capped vs. not. If building deltas are slow the solution is not to disable them but to find out why there are slow and fix that. One thing for instance is that it insists on generating the original rpm while creating an uncompressed rpm would save a compress + uncompressed cycle during updates (the former is a bit extensive for xz). -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
