[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

re: proposal for a more efficient download process

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <he@ftwca.de> wrote:

>Nope. You will need to keep all normal debs anyway, for new

i thought it could be possible in the end to download the tree-package and all its patches to then have the latest package for a new install! so i thought there will be no more need for a lot of full packages. is it not? one of the advantages could be that you have more versions available then just the latest - this would be great for sid!

>Now the interesting questions: How many diffs do you keep?

i thought of keeping the tree-package and its patches as long it makes sence. for example if there is a next-version package and the patches would grow to big, there will come up a new tree-package. well, yes, it is difficult to think this through, but anyway!

>How do you
>integrate this approach with the minimal security Release files give us
>today? What about the kind of signatures dpkg-sig provides?

sure. this proposal would require a lot of changes not just a few. but as i have suggested not to make a .deb oriented but a file oriented patchment, the new package will be created on the users system with the downloaded patch(es). so in the end, there will be a .deb package in the cache and it will just install as always. if you make a package-mirror- update to look for updates, it just will show there is a new package.
the user will not find out that it just downloads the patches.
hope that answers your question. i am not quite sure. i am new!
so please try to ask in another way if this does not satisfy you!
thank's :-)
greetings from austria

well, though i think i can't fix that problem, but i believe i can make a workaround!
curt manucredo

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity,
and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein

Reply to: