Yum deltarpm

[Ahmed Kamal]

Hi,
The delta rpm support now looks pretty functional (at least for me). The
"presto" project is now up at
https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/presto
Feel free to grab the code and test.

The most important missing piece of the puzzle is more testing! I would like
any mirror of "updates" for FC6 to host delta rpms, so that people can start
testing, reporting bugs, and we can work to fix them. Unfortunately, I don't
have the means to host such a mirror! I mailed the mirror admins list, but
no volunteers till now. If anyone is interested in helping with this, please
contact me. The disk space required shouldn't be too much, because we could
mirror just the FC6 release (only i386 as well for now), also the bandwidth
required would be minimal (am I gonna get that much testers :)

cheers

On 2/3/07, Ahmed Kamal <email.ahmedkamal at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> It seems suse uses "_" as a separator, and will mention the version once
> if it is the same across the 2 rpms. For example
> kernel-xenpae-2.6.16.13_2.6.16.21-4_0.21.i586.delta.rpm<ftp://ftp.cs.pu.edu.tw/pub2/SuSE/suse/update/10.1/rpm/i586/kernel-xenpae-2.6.16.13_2.6.16.21-4_0.21.i586.delta.rpm>
> That would be name-verOld_verNew-relOld_relNew.arch.delta.rpm
> and libextractor-0.5.10-12_12.2.i586.delta.rpm<ftp://ftp.cs.pu.edu.tw/pub2/SuSE/suse/update/10.1/rpm/i586/libextractor-0.5.10-12_12.2.i586.delta.rpm>shows using a single version number
>
>
> On 2/3/07, Ahmed Kamal < email.ahmedkamal at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > AFAIK, suse does use .delta.rpm as can be found here
> > http://www.filewatcher.com/b/ftp/ftp.cs.pu.edu.tw/pub2/SuSE/suse/update/10.1/rpm/i586.0.0.html
> >
> >
> > Tried to guess their naming convention, it seems something like
> > "newVer_oldVer-release", not sure why there is a single release, and it's
> > not even consistent. I'm trying to lookup some info on their naming
> > convention.
> >
> > On 2/3/07, Toshio Kuratomi < a.badger at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2007-02-02 at 19:32 +0200, Ahmed Kamal wrote:
> > > > One tiny thing I am facing is the naming convention to be used for
> > > the
> > > > resulting drpms. This name needs to reflect both versions for which
> > > > this delta was made. I am thinking I need to use something like:
> > > > " name-VerNew-RelNew-VerOld-RelOld.arch.drpm"
> > > > Not sure if this would cause any issues, I mean not using the
> > > standard
> > > > rpm naming scheme. But then again, this is not a rpm, which is why I
> > >
> > > > chose suffix .drpm instead of say .delta.rpm
> > > > Let me know what you guys think
> > > >
> > > What does SuSE use when they generate delata-rpms?  (I do like drpm
> > > better than delta.rpm).
> > >
> > > -Toshio
> > >
> > >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20070221/8c7a772a/attachment.html