Updating RPMs using binary deltas (demo)

[Axel Thimm]

Hi,

On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 12:57:41PM +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-01-27 at 12:43, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:
> > > For those folks that want to eventually have optional RPM diffs for 
> > > upgrades, please do not continue the discussion here.
> > 
> > This is the Fedora devel list, right? Maybe more on topic on the RPM
> > list, but still a development issue, so IMHO rather on topic in this
> > forum.
> > 
> > I haven't fe seen people talking about kernel issues being referred to
> > kernel.org, because their discussions would be more on topic there. If
> > you are not interested in the issue don't read the threads.
> 
> While this is a development issue, an RPM diffing tool is in no way
> Fedora specific (I hope). Kernel related discussion here seems (to me)
> concentrated on kernel-on-FC or FC-kernels, luckily we don't have the
> huge mess that is called lkml here. I think an RPM diffing tool would be
> most on-topic on rpm-list (out of the pool of existing mailing lists),
> what'd be on-topic here would be (when it's ready) discussing eventual
> inclusion in FC, whether or not it should be used for distribution of FC
> packages, etc...

I haven't seen any such fruitful discussion about this theme since
long, and I enjoy the ideas and actual work being done on this. The
thread is only a couple mails, it doesn't disturb and could lead to
something very useful IMHO.

To get to the topic: There have been some comments on SuSE's way of
doing this and why it is not accepted in rpm mainstream at the
packaging list, which unfortunatley seems to have died a quite death
in May:

http://mail.freestandards.org/pipermail/packaging/2003-March/000214.html

It shows that solutions are crafted within distributions and then
presented upstream (and are being rejected, but that should not scare
anyone off). It also contains valuable hints as to what kind of
solutions rpm could accept upstream.

The rpm-list is also more a user list than a development list. The
interesting development "discussions" about rpm can usually be found
at bugzilla.redhat.com. Nevertheless posting a summary mail at
rpm-list about the current status would not be wrong.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at physik.fu-berlin.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20040127/8ca2627e/attachment.sig>