On Tue, 2021-01-05 at 08:49 -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> To be blunt, I would have never done Zchunk metadata if it was going
> to be used as a tool to kill DeltaRPMs. I firmly believe we need both
> to have a comprehensive offering that accommodates the needs of
> Fedora users across the world.
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 08:01:04PM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 05. 01. 21 v 19:44 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> > On the next f33-updates push the entire process runs again. It never
> > _updates_ existing repos, it always creates them.
>
> Ahh. So this all worked when we run the the process
Dne 05. 01. 21 v 19:44 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> On the next f33-updates push the entire process runs again. It never
> _updates_ existing repos, it always creates them.
Ahh. So this all worked when we run the the process once per week. But because
we run it every day now, the deltas are
minimal.
Dne 05. 01. 21 v 15:31 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> Yet another reason why popcon would be useful.
https://github.com/xsuchy/popcon-for-fedora-old
Feel free to take it :)
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Associate Manager ABRT/Copr, #brno, #fedora-buildsys
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 09:49:59AM +0100, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 05. 01. 21 v 0:29 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
> > So, the first thing we need to do to fix this is move deltarpm creation out
> > of the updates process.
>
> Right.
>
> > Kevin Fenzi tells me this would mean we'd need a
> >
Dne 05. 01. 21 v 0:50 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 06:29:13PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 10:21:15PM +, Matthew Almond via devel wrote:
There's been a lot of interesting talk about the state and future of
drpm. I'd like to propose we continue
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 3:46 PM Florian Weimer wrote:
> The metadata would also be much larger, and so would be the battery
> usage to recompress the payload. 8-(
And while the bandwidth reduction has value,
cpu and wallclock time to rebuild the rpm is
substantially increased for low end devices
* Matthew Miller:
> On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 11:30:10AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> > I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
>> > real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off.
>>
>> Is it really saving bandwidth, though? The reported
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 11:30:10AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
> > real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off.
>
> Is it really saving bandwidth, though? The reported savings are
> generally very
On Tue, 5 Jan 2021 at 03:50, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Dne 05. 01. 21 v 0:29 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
> > So, the first thing we need to do to fix this is move deltarpm creation
> out
> > of the updates process.
>
> Right.
>
> > Kevin Fenzi tells me this would mean we'd need a
> > separate delta
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 06:29:13PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
> real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off. But that's
> definitely plan B. We can point people who are in low-bandwidth situations
>
Hi,
> we aren't making very many, which makes them even less useful. Plus, we're
> only making them between updates and for packages where those updates are
> frequent, that means you need to keep on top of things, which may be best
> practice but is most difficult for low-bandwidth users who
On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 08:49:20AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 8:34 AM Colin Walters wrote:
> > Now speaking of deltas - really delta implementations are going to benefit
> > from a stronger "cadence" to releases, exactly much like what we do for
> > CoreOS (but not
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 8:34 AM Colin Walters wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2021, at 6:29 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >
> > I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
> > real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off. But that's
> > definitely plan
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021, at 6:29 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
> real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off. But that's
> definitely plan B. We can point people who are in low-bandwidth situations
> at
> Is it really saving bandwidth, though? The reported savings are
> generally very small for me. Downloading the metadata costs something
> as well.
In F33, mostly so. I generally keep up to date (update once a week),
but available deltarpms have been lesser compared to earlier versions.
I used
* Matthew Miller:
> I also remember when this was a killer feature for Fedora, and without any
> real way of judging use and demand, I'm hesitant to kill it off.
Is it really saving bandwidth, though? The reported savings are
generally very small for me. Downloading the metadata costs
Dne 05. 01. 21 v 0:29 Matthew Miller napsal(a):
> So, the first thing we need to do to fix this is move deltarpm creation out
> of the updates process.
Right.
> Kevin Fenzi tells me this would mean we'd need a
> separate delta RPMs repo,
Why? You can do that in the same repo. You just need
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 06:29:13PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 10:21:15PM +, Matthew Almond via devel wrote:
> > There's been a lot of interesting talk about the state and future of
> > drpm. I'd like to propose we continue the conversation about that with
> > a
On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 10:21:15PM +, Matthew Almond via devel wrote:
> There's been a lot of interesting talk about the state and future of
> drpm. I'd like to propose we continue the conversation about that with
> a different subject line :)
Okay, fair. I have a proposal.
Right now, the
20 matches
Mail list logo
