A more efficient up2date service using binary diffs

[Joe Desbonnet]

We have to set realistic expectations here. There seems to be some
reluctance within Redhat to upgrade the current update mechanism.  I
doubt we will get any of their programmers working on it. So whatever
is likely to work must be do-able by one or two people in a few
months. That, IMHO, means working with the RPM system. RPMs have been
part of Redhat since the beginning (it can be argued that it's what
put Redhat on the Linux map in the first place). I firmly believe that
a repository of deltas that can be applied to the existing RPMs to
produce update RPMs in addition to the usual download the whole RPM
approach can yield a speed increase of x 4 or better for those on
narrow band links.

Keeping a GB or two of RPMs on disk to enable this to happen is, I
believe, a very small price to pay -- especially if the user can
choose if they want to or not.  I disagree that Windows does not
require you to keep your OS distribution on disk. I believe most
machines sold with XP come with complete re-install kits, often kept
in a hidden partition.

Joe.


On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 08:38:44 -0500, Paul A. Houle <ph18 at cornell.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:21:57 -0500, Chuck R. Anderson <cra at WPI.EDU> wrote:

>         We really have to think about the ease of use standards set by the
> competition.  I recently had to buy a Mac mini for some consulting work,
> and really,  Mac OS X makes any Linux distribution look bad.
> 
>         I doubt either Windows Update or the equivalent under Mac OS X has a
> granularity as coarse as rpms.  Neither of those requires that you keep
> your OS disk around or burns up 4G on your disk with packages.
>