From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_REJECT, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from other.worlds.no (other.worlds.no [217.8.136.224]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 8BD68ABB3D for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 07:14:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: (qmail 10182 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2002 12:23:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO skarby.no) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 2 Oct 2002 12:23:53 -0000 Received: from 10.0.7.101 (SquirrelMail authenticated user scaru) by webmail.interhost.no with HTTP; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 14:23:53 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <33221.10.0.7.101.1033561433.squirrel@webmail.interhost.no> Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 14:23:53 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage question From: "Christian Skarby" To: In-Reply-To: <20021002135449.66b52d4c.bain@reaper.org> References: <3D9A2B1A.5010903@level7.ro> <20021002092206.0e79a105.bain@reaper.org> <20021002073908.GA12221@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> <200210021102.42324.arutha@gmx.de> <20021002120659.50d88c3f.bain@reaper.org> <33154.10.0.7.101.1033559619.squirrel@webmail.interhost.no> <20021002135449.66b52d4c.bain@reaper.org> X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal Cc: X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.8) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 0d14552d-10d1-4f3b-bbc3-af778c33b122 X-Archives-Hash: a33aeb8d3d046f7b7a912c0c1537f804 > On Wed, 2 Oct 2002 13:53:39 +0200 (CEST) > "Christian Skarby" wrote: > >> I kind of like the idea of this feature, but AFAIK are diffs most >> usefull when there are little difference from the source-files we >> already have. I.e. as soon as all the code is changed a diff-file will >> include both the old and the new source. If we implement this feature >> I think it would be nice to put some logic into it so that it can >> (f.ex. by looking at file-sizes) decide if one should download a patch >> or two or rather download the full source. > > the whole point of a diff/patch file is to make only changes made to the > source .. not carry the original .. > > Henti Smith :) I think I'll have to be a bit more spesific on this If we have a source-1.0 that reads /* This is a lovely comment */ and then a source-1.1 that reads /* This comment make more sense */ a diff would look something like /* - This is a lovely comment + This comment make more sense */ As we see the diff is larger than both the sources, and this will happen as soon as the all the source is fully replaced. This is actually a worst case scenario and hence not a good example, nevertheless I believe that fetching source-1.0.tar.gz and patch-1.1.tar.gz often will result in downloading more than just source-1.1.tar.gz, thus it will not be cost effective to get the patch unless one already have the sources that the patch applies to. Therefor I believe that if we should implement this into portage it would be nice to have some checks looking at what relevant source-files we already have, how large the patches are and how large the full source download is. Then it should be quite easy to consider what will be the least time consuming download. Taking in consideration that many (most/all?) gentoo-users keep their systems up to date at all times with emerge -u world it probably would be a great ideá just with patches, but I think that new installs and install of packages with huge rewrites will benefit from having clean full source downloads. Thus I suggest these checks. Please arrest me if I am wrong .. All the best, Christian