Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Reporting_Bug_Guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in Unsupported. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#56128 - {mkinitcpio} patch for --rsyncable option

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Charles Duffy (charles-dyfis-net) - Thursday, 26 October 2017, 17:43 GMT
Last edited by Eli Schwartz (eschwartz) - Thursday, 26 October 2017, 18:30 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category Arch Projects
Status Assigned
Assigned To Dave Reisner (falconindy)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 0%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Presently, running consecutive cpio builds with the same inputs, the resulting outputs can be almost entirely different. This means that using a storage system such as `rdiff-backup`, a binary-delta-based update distribution mechanism such as `casync`, or the like will effectively need to store both old and new builds in full, no matter how small the actual change between them.

With the attached patch, consecutive builds which previously had ~27.5MB of deltas are reduced to only 120KB of data transmitted by rsync to sync them (at a cost of somewhat worse compression and lost timestamps within the cpio archive, hence keeping this option off-by-default).
This task depends upon

Comment by Eli Schwartz (eschwartz) - Thursday, 26 October 2017, 18:30 GMT
  • Field changed: Summary ([PATCH] mkinitcpio --rsyncable → {mkinitcpio} patch for --rsyncable option)
  • Field changed: Status (Unconfirmed → Assigned)
  • Field changed: Category (Packages: Core → Arch Projects)
  • Task assigned to Dave Reisner (falconindy)
You're probably best off sending this to the arch-projects mailing list for discussion: https://lists.archlinux.org/listinfo/arch-projects

Kind of awkward to do patch review here, but...

Why does it matter whether rsyncable is used, for purposes of sorting the filelist passed on to cpio? AFAIK there is no downside to doing it either way... it simplifies the logic.
Comment by Charles Duffy (charles-dyfis-net) - Thursday, 26 October 2017, 19:39 GMT
Good point. Patch attached (which --autosquash should merge) that makes the filename sort nonconditional, and also adds -n to the set of gzip options in use when --rsyncable is specified.

Will be starting an arch-projects thread momentarily. No position taken on whether to keep this ticket open in the interim. (BTW, might not hurt to mention the arch-projects list in the HACKING or README files going forward).
Comment by Charles Duffy (charles-dyfis-net) - Friday, 27 October 2017, 16:58 GMT

Loading...