Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 15:15:03 -0500 From: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net> To: kris@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Patchkits Message-ID: <00042515150301.02802@nomad.dataplex.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004251235420.11211-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004251235420.11211-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Wilko Bulte wrote: > > OK. But you do have to uniquely identify the binary that needs to be > > patched. So, my question is when you generate 10x the same binary, will > > all these 10 binaries have the same MD5 checksum? In other words: if > > people did a local buildworld once on a -release sourcetree will all the > > executables have the same MD5 as the ones on the -release cdrom? > > I don't think a binary patch is workable: all it takes is a single local > buildworld and you've got an unpatchable system. Furthermore, I'd > speculate that binary patches would usually be on the same order of size > as the file itself. What *would* work is including the entire new file in > the package. This is what solaris does. > > However, there are serious regression-testing and dependency problems with > a scheme like this - i.e. making sure you've included *all* of the > relevant changes. Sounds like a package manager from another OS. :-) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00042515150301.02802>