Re: [softwaremgmt] YUM patterns metadata
Hi, On Tue, 22 May 2007, Duncan Mac-Vicar Prett wrote:
mental model of patches is a blob of dependencies and some file deltas, where the file deltas is the more important part. But I guess it's not important how my mental model is. It doesn't help nor hinder their implementation as actual rpms.
Actually they are just metadata that depends on newer rpms. The fact that some of these rpms can be installed downloading delta/patch rpms is something evaluated at commit time and not at solving time, thus the patch does not need to know about rpms at all, it only need to express which version of a group of packages fixes the problem. The commit logic should grab and rpm and install it, or download a script and run it to patch a binary, or get a delta rpm, or untar something in /.
So the file delta is just an implementation detail, but it is not in the patch itself.
Right. That's why I said my mental model of patches includes the delta. If it really is inside the patch or not (or for that matter if a patch consists of one file, or a set of files) wasn't that interesting for me in that discussion. It's obvious that the file delta part of patches is better implemented as dependencies on versioned rpms, instead of duplicating them directly into the physical patch. But conceptually (to me!) a patch includes that delta. But that's all not very important. What's much more important IMHO is to try to implement patterns as rpms.
Note: in our current metadata it is, but just because the patch format is missdesigned. They not need to be there (therefore all packages are duplicated inside the patch and the primary file!!)
Ciao, Michael. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-softwaremgmt+help@opensuse.org
participants (1)
-
Michael Matz