On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Pierre Schmitz email@example.com wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 11. Februar 2009 20:19:13 schrieb Aaron Griffin:
I would be nice to have xdelta patches the next time to reduce the traffic. (Downloading from gerolde is quite slow; not to mention the years it takes to upload those isos :-)).
You mean an xdelta patch from 2009.02 to 2009.XX ? Something about that doesn't sit right with me, but I guess I could do it
The difference between major releases might be too big, but it should really speed up testing if only a few chagnes are made.
And of course the overhead of up/downloading the img and iso images can be reduced.
I just made a diff between archlinux-2009.02-RC2-core-i686.iso and archlinux-2009.02-RC2-core-i686.img. The resulting patch is only 1,2MB. (And yes, using the iso and that patch produces a img with the same md5sum)
Wow this is getting complicated... so are you saying that we should provide xdelta patches from ISO to USB image? What about from ftp ISO to core ISO?
That seems like a lot more work for smaller benefit. In the future, we're going to have a machine setup for building these and will host the ISOs directly from there, so this transfer back and forth will be nonexistent. Would the xdeltas still be useful at that point?