On Sat, Jan 2, 2021, at 10:03 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > I fail to see why this would be significantly better... I don't claim that the "separate temporary directory of unpacked content" is *better* - just that it's as easy to implement *and* doesn't require an RPM format change (with all the consequent pain) or support for reflinks from the underlying filesystem. > The logic to > handle the split rpm contents would seem to be more complicated than the > rewrite with /usr/bin/rpm2extents. Other comments? Hard to really say for sure I guess without trying to write both. Probably the biggest impediment is that changes like that would end up needing to be split across the librpm + zypper/rpm-ostree/dnf tools. It wasn't an accident really that for rpm-ostree /usr/bin/rpm is read-only - we effectively squash those layers togther and can thus make deep changes as a single unit. Anyways, none of this really *requires* reflinks in any way and so calling the Change "RPMCoW" is misleading from that perspective. "DnfParallelUnpack" would probably be a better title, with a dependency on "RPMFormatCowReady" or something. And then my point is that one could do "DnfParallelUnpack" without changing the RPM format without much more complexity, if any. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
