Delta-Debs are already developing, it's just not something we wanted to do yet last I knew. It adds a ton more complication server end.
On Jan 12, 2008 3:41 PM, Evan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Currently, when a minor patch is uploaded to the update mirrors, Ubuntu > users must download the entire deb package again. When it is a big package > (say OpenOffice.org) and it is a small patch of just a few lines of code, > this can get somewhat ridiculous. (Update size generally < 50MB) > > When Windows/OSX users recieve a patch, they get it in the form of an > execuable (.msi IIRC) which modifies the executable directly. While this > method saves considerable space over our current method, it would impose a > major strain on the package maintainers to create an updater for every > version. (Update size generally < 5MB) > > Any change in this area is far too complex for a LTS, however for 8.10 we > have the opportunity to be innovative and create a new patching system > better than that being used by the competition: > > Write a new program that is generically designed to modify any binary > according to parameters it is passed. Write a second program that compares > two .deb packages and outputs the parameters the first program would need to > get from version 1 to version 2. (Update size generally < 1MB) > > An example would work like this: > > 1. A new package called abc is added to the repos at version 1. > 2. Bob installs abc from synaptic. > 3. The creator of abc writes a patch, and packages abc version 1.1the way > they do now. > 4. When uploaded, the server that handles uploads compares version > 1.1 with version 1 and outputs an update file (some sort of xml > format?) > 5. Bob checks for updates, finds that abc has a new version, and > downloads the update, which is only the xml update file > 6. The installer passes the new binary-update program the xml file > it downloaded, and the abc binary is updated with the patch. > > Pros: > > - No extra work for package maintainers. > - Extremely tiny updates. > > Cons: > > - The method I described can't handle updates to non-binary files > (help files, icons, etc.) This would have to be integrated somehow. > - The framework would take considerable effort by the devs to set > up. > > Overall, I think this new method is definitely a huge step forward. We are > currently behind MS and Apple in this regard, and we have the opportunity > not just to catch up, but to pass them. It would take a lot of work to get > right, but it would be worth it. > > Evan > > -- > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list > Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss > > -- Cheers, Bryan Freenode: Toxicity999
-- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
