On 2/28/23 05:06, Petr Pisar wrote:
V Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 02:47:03AM -0000, Daniel Alley napsal(a):
> I am not sure whether by "all historical updates" you are only referring
> all updates being listed in updateinfo.xml, or all history generally
> (including old packages).
> But in the latter case, note that keeping all
> updates massively inflates the storage requirements for maintaining a copy
> of the repo, which many (or even most) corporate users do. This is not
> a huge problem, generally, but it's also not ideal, and probably isn't the
> right tradeoff for Fedora.
I know. I only replied the question.
> Here for example is RHEL 8 baseos and appstream, for which the difference
> between storing "only the latest package" and "all the packages
> 20x and 10x, respectively. Metadata size would likewise be larger, meaning
> DNF clients have more to download.
I don't say Fedora needs to do it the same way. Fedora could only accumulate
updateinfos while only retaining the latest package. Would it inflate
metadata? Definitely. But if you want to deliver the data to the clients, you
have to store them somewhere. Would that affect all clients? No.
updateinfo.xml can only be downloaded by clients requesting that data. People
doing "dnf upgrade" can safely skip it.
Or Fedora could reverse it: Fedora would run a network service which clients
would send a list of installed packages and the service would return a list of
affected packages. At the end, ostree od debuginfod services work like that.
debuginfod clients should be checking the downloaded data against a hash included
in the binary being debugged.
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)