kernel-source - could we patch instead?

[Leonard den Ottolander]

Hi Jack,

(Nice last name in this context :)

> For the kernel-source, would it be possible to issue
> a patch instead of requiring the full 39MB download for
> each kernel update?

As Sean already pointed out binary patches do not make much sense when you 
work with compressed data. The recompressed patched rpm will give a totally 
different pattern, which make xdelta patching useless.

For use with srpms there is another possible approach though: Release  
updated SPEC files and new patches separately . You can build new rpms 
(including the kernel-source rpm) using the original srpm with the new 
patches and SPEC file. Signing should then be done on the patch bundle 
instead of on the srpm.

As a side note, an rsync extension to update rpms by comparing individual 
files inside the cpio I was thinking about (as an analogy to iso updates 
with rsync using tar(.gz)s), has the drawback that the used compression 
algorithm will not always produce the exact same output on identical input, 
which is why you can't use such an approach on signed rpms. If the used 
compression algorithm would always produce the same output on the same 
input the signature could also be patched and rsync could be taught to 
update rpms.

Bye,
Leonard.

--
mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research