On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 03:04:24PM +0100, Robert Lemmen wrote: >On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 09:46:52AM +0300, NirinaMichel Ratoandromanana/DS-ETU wrote: >> Today on freshmeat, I found a tool named zsync similar to rsync for an >> incremental transfer of a large file over http without the complexity of >> rsync. >> As I am under sarge (3.1 release is for when? I heard of September), I >> think the use of zsync over jigdo is prefered because zsync avoid the >> re-download of the .jigdo and .template files and because of the "rsync >> algorithm", I suppose, there will be a substantial gain. >> Regards. > >i tried zsync, and will probably be the zsync maintainer and i think i can >comment on that: while it *might* be cool to do that in the future, it >certainly isn't right now, zsync simply isn't ready and won't be in the next >months. in the long run zsync only helps if you already have parts of the >image, in which case jigdo is as well able to redownload only those .debs that >have changed, and understands more of the internal structure of the image, so >i doubt that zsync will get you much (except that it's easier perhaps). IIRC there are some quite nasty patents in this area too, especially with work being done on the client side. That's why rsync does it on the server end... -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. steve@einval.com Support the Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression: http://www.eff.org/cafe/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature