On Sat, Jan 2, 2021, at 10:03 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:

> I fail to see why this would be significantly better...

I don't claim that the "separate temporary directory of unpacked content" is 
*better* - just that it's as easy to implement *and* doesn't require an RPM 
format change (with all the consequent pain) or support for reflinks from the 
underlying filesystem.

>  The logic to
> handle the split rpm contents would seem to be more complicated than the
> rewrite with /usr/bin/rpm2extents. Other comments?

Hard to really say for sure I guess without trying to write both.  Probably the 
biggest impediment is that changes like that would end up needing to be split 
across the librpm + zypper/rpm-ostree/dnf tools.  It wasn't an accident really 
that for rpm-ostree /usr/bin/rpm is read-only - we effectively squash those 
layers togther and can thus make deep changes as a single unit.

Anyways, none of this really *requires* reflinks in any way and so calling the 
Change "RPMCoW" is misleading from that perspective.  "DnfParallelUnpack" would 
probably be a better title, with a dependency on "RPMFormatCowReady" or 
something.  And then my point is that one could do "DnfParallelUnpack" without 
changing the RPM format without much more complexity, if any.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to