AFAIK, suse does use .delta.rpm as can be found here <a href="http://www.filewatcher.com/b/ftp/ftp.cs.pu.edu.tw/pub2/SuSE/suse/update/10.1/rpm/i586.0.0.html">http://www.filewatcher.com/b/ftp/ftp.cs.pu.edu.tw/pub2/SuSE/suse/update/10.1/rpm/i586.0.0.html </a> Tried to guess their naming convention, it seems something like "newVer_oldVer-release", not sure why there is a single release, and it's not even consistent. I'm trying to lookup some info on their naming convention. <div>On 2/3/07, Toshio Kuratomi <<a href="mailto:a.badger@gmail.com">a.badger@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On Fri, 2007-02-02 at 19:32 +0200, Ahmed Kamal wrote: > One tiny thing I am facing is the naming convention to be used for the > resulting drpms. This name needs to reflect both versions for which > this delta was made. I am thinking I need to use something like: > " name-VerNew-RelNew-VerOld-RelOld.arch.drpm" > Not sure if this would cause any issues, I mean not using the standard > rpm naming scheme. But then again, this is not a rpm, which is why I > chose suffix .drpm instead of say .delta.rpm > Let me know what you guys think > What does SuSE use when they generate delata-rpms? (I do like drpm better than delta.rpm). -Toshio </blockquote> </div>