Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:56:22 +0000 From: Colin Percival <colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk> To: Lawrence Sica <lomion@mac.com> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Less messages to FreeBSD.org lists Message-ID: <6.0.1.1.1.20040126185301.046c5ae0@imap.sfu.ca> In-Reply-To: <7D8253A2-5030-11D8-9620-000393A335A2@mac.com> References: <4013EA9D.6040808@cream.org> <20040125134151.M52260@mail.tacorp.net> <20040125185753.GA12995@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> <40141B3D.9070901@cream.org> <20040125194721.GA28036@xor.obsecurity.org> <40143CC3.6010709@cream.org> <401514D3.7020808@iconoplex.co.uk> <6.0.1.1.1.20040126133123.0465b398@imap.sfu.ca> <40152488.8070309@iconoplex.co.uk> <6.0.1.1.1.20040126183938.046fcec0@imap.sfu.ca> <7D8253A2-5030-11D8-9620-000393A335A2@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 18:50 26/01/2004, Lawrence Sica wrote: >On Jan 26, 2004, at 1:44 PM, Colin Percival wrote: > > Yes and no. Windows Update can behave badly. But I'm not talking >>about Windows Update; I'm talking about FreeBSD Update, which is very >>well behaved (and *much* faster, for that matter). > >Ever see the OS X Software Update? It works really well. Is that the one which uses compressed cpio archives containing the new versions of any updated files? I guess it's ok if you *want* to waste bandwidth and your customers' time, but personally I like the factor-of-50 reduction in bandwidth which FreeBSD Update accomplishes by using binary diffs. Colin Percival
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6.0.1.1.1.20040126185301.046c5ae0>