1 |
g2boojum |
1.1 |
GLEP: 9 |
2 |
|
|
Title: Gentoo Package Update System |
3 |
g2boojum |
1.3 |
Version: $Revision: 1.2 $ |
4 |
|
|
Last-Modified: $Date: 2003/07/25 22:32:20 $ |
5 |
g2boojum |
1.1 |
Author: John J. Whitney <jjw@linuxmail.org> |
6 |
g2boojum |
1.3 |
Status: deferred |
7 |
g2boojum |
1.1 |
Type: Standards Track |
8 |
|
|
Content-Type: text/x-rst |
9 |
|
|
Created: 19-Jul-2003 |
10 |
|
|
Post-History: 25-Jul-2003 |
11 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
Abstract |
14 |
|
|
======== |
15 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
This document proposes an official package updating system for Gentoo Linux. |
17 |
|
|
The Deltup project has been developed for this purpose. [#DELTUP]_ |
18 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
As packages grow larger the amount of redundant data keeps increasing. Updating |
20 |
|
|
existing tarballs by patching is the natural way to handle source updates. |
21 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
Motivation |
23 |
|
|
========== |
24 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
This system will reduce mirror loads (potentially mirror size as well) and |
26 |
|
|
significantly speed up downloads, making Gentoo much more attractive for users |
27 |
|
|
with low-bandwidth connections. |
28 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
Server Implementation |
30 |
|
|
===================== |
31 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
I propose that the patches be put onto the Gentoo Mirrors and stored in a new |
33 |
|
|
directory called "patchfiles" which could be placed beside "distfiles". |
34 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
It would be advantageous to have a list of available patches within the portage |
36 |
|
|
tree so that it can be updated during "emerge sync". A file named "dtu.list" |
37 |
|
|
can be created and placed in $PORTDIR/profiles. |
38 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
If a machine can be set up to generate patches it should contain a local mirror |
40 |
|
|
of distfiles which it can monitor for added packages. When a package is added |
41 |
|
|
to distfiles the machine can try to determine the previous tarball so a patch |
42 |
|
|
can be made and placed in the patchfiles dir. In addition, special-case patches |
43 |
|
|
can be added manually. |
44 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
The dtu.list file will be maintained by a special script. Whenever patches |
46 |
|
|
are added or removed to the patchfiles dir, the script will make necessary |
47 |
|
|
additions/removals in dtu.list. This will be done with minimal changes in the |
48 |
|
|
file so it can be synchronized efficiently. |
49 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
Client Implementation |
51 |
|
|
===================== |
52 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
The system will be optional for users and can be enabled by making portage |
54 |
|
|
invoke efetch through the FETCHCOMMAND environment variable [#TINYHOWTO]_. |
55 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
When a package fetch is requested, the efetch/fetchcommand scripts (part of |
57 |
|
|
Deltup) will scan the dtu.list file for updates and try downloading and applying |
58 |
|
|
them if they exist, or fall back to a full package download if they don't or if |
59 |
|
|
the patching process fails. |
60 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
Rationale |
62 |
|
|
========= |
63 |
|
|
The most controversial feature has been the addition of dtu.list to the portage |
64 |
|
|
tree, so in this section I will list the reasons I support it. |
65 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
- Flexibility. Without it, there must be a standard naming scheme which we |
67 |
|
|
would be stuck with once the system is in place. Changing the system would |
68 |
|
|
require serious compatibility breaks. With the dtu.list file we can change |
69 |
|
|
the naming scheme easily without problems, or even have several different |
70 |
|
|
naming schemes. |
71 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
- Features. Without patch information detecting different upgrade paths would |
73 |
|
|
be impossible. Split package patching would also be impossible. If the info |
74 |
|
|
is available we can use it to find the quickest upgrade path, like jumping |
75 |
|
|
from a .0 release, or even disable certain patches if there are problems with |
76 |
|
|
them. |
77 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
- It would be impossible to know which packages to upgrade from in some cases, |
79 |
|
|
including renamed packages. |
80 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
- Knowing which patches are available will eliminate the overhead of attempting |
82 |
|
|
to download patches which don't exist. |
83 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
The dtu.list file will contain several hundred kilobytes of data. That has |
85 |
|
|
caused some concern over how efficiently it can be rsynced. To address these |
86 |
|
|
concerns the file's format will be plaintext and care has been taken to |
87 |
|
|
minimize the number of changes as removals/additions are made. |
88 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
Backwards Compatibility |
90 |
|
|
======================= |
91 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
There are no backwards compatibility issues since Deltup can generate correct |
93 |
|
|
package MD5sums. |
94 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
Conclusion |
97 |
|
|
========== |
98 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
I suggest we start with a scaled-down implementation and provide more as the |
100 |
|
|
demand increases. All of the necesary code is already written and working in |
101 |
|
|
non-official tests. |
102 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
References |
104 |
|
|
========== |
105 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
.. [#DELTUP] http://sourceforge.net/projects/deltup |
107 |
|
|
.. [#PATCHES] ftp://sunsite.dk/projects/deltup/patchfiles |
108 |
|
|
.. [#TINYHOWTO] Tiny Deltup HOWTO |
109 |
|
|
(http://www.thedoh.com/linux/HOWTO/deltup) |
110 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
Copyright |
112 |
|
|
========= |
113 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
This document has been placed in the public domain. |