[pacman-dev] [PATCH 3/4] Download delta files if UseDelta is set.

[Dan McGee]

On 10/18/07, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/18/07, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2007/10/18, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com>:
> > > On 10/17/07, Xavier <shiningxc at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Isn't the cleanest way to use xdelta api?
> > > > For example, we use libarchive instead of bsdtar, libdownload instead of wget
> > > > (even though there is the XferCommand trick), a md5 driver instead of md5sum
> > > > command, etc
> > >
> > > Technically yes, but I think in this case this is the only option
> > > available - either xdelta has no API, or using it is like a few
> > > hundred lines... I can't remember which
> > >
> >
> > Xdelta3 does have an API:
> > http://code.google.com/p/xdelta/wiki/ProgrammingGuide
>
> Well, color me stupid! I didn't research this at all.
>
> So yeah, I'll side with Chantry here - it's probably better to use the
> actual API rather than external apps like that.
> Here's a good reason - in a "omg panic" situation where libs are
> broken, pacman.static can still work, but not if it has to call
> external apps like this that could be broken.

Thoughts but no for sure answers, I'll let those who are actually
writing the code decide.
1. Using the API does introduce yet another dependency for
pacman...our ldd output is starting to get a bit lengthy for what I
feel should be a low level tool. If someone doesn't ever use the delta
features of pacman, they would still have to have xdelta installed
(because of the dynamic link at runtime, and yet some more mem usage).
2. xdelta3 tarball was chmodded all wrong. Please tell me the
developer just made a mistake here, otherwise it is very windows
focused. And the configure script is no longer there...
3. In an "omg panic" situation, I highly doubt someone would want to
use delta packages anyway, I'd rather be absolutely positive I was
getting the real stuff.

-Dan