From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OJZA1-0000jz-72 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2010 21:38:09 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F4130E0F93; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 21:37:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFB8BE0F93 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 21:37:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.22.4] (ip68-4-152-120.oc.oc.cox.net [68.4.152.120]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6053A1B400D for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2010 21:37:44 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4C057DA4.5050408@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 14:37:40 -0700 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100419 Thunderbird/3.0.4 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Package compression header for binhosts References: <4C047F52.30209@gentoo.org> <20100601051608.GD19306@hrair> <1275422465.24611.9.camel@hangover> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: a847b79d-3dd4-463f-afaa-c0caf93fbc94 X-Archives-Hash: d598ab26e38bbf4ef2e65db047a3a64e On 06/01/2010 02:22 PM, Brian Harring wrote: > As for zacs tool to try and generate new views of a repository via > hardlinking/recreating the tree... frankly it's a bit of a hack. Via > DEFAULT_URI and relying on the hash, you can make a stable repository that > is able to be updated in place without corrupting ongoing downloads- simply > put, new additions to the repo don't perturb current DL's since the md5 is > the same (hash collision chance is low enough that I don't care about it > here). When you say "hash collision" are you talking about http://crosbug.com/3225? Maybe that behavior is acceptable for small-scale private use, but for large scale public repositories I'd say it's totally unacceptable. Eventually, I'd like to see gentoo officially distributing binary packages, so that we'll be able to get a slice of the binary distribution pie. When that happens, we're certainly not going to want to have race conditions like these in our public binhosts. -- Thanks, Zac