From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Nov 19 13:34:18 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 95F5C16A4CE; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 13:34:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id D4F6A43FAF; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 13:34:16 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com)
Received: from apollo.backplane.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	hAJLYGiF002845;	Wed, 19 Nov 2003 13:34:16 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com)
Received: (from dillon@localhost)
	by apollo.backplane.com (8.12.9p2/8.12.9/Submit) id hAJLYGHV002844;
	Wed, 19 Nov 2003 13:34:16 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from dillon)
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 13:34:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>
Message-Id: <200311192134.hAJLYGHV002844@apollo.backplane.com>
To: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0311192126430.3227-100000@a.mx.ict1.everquick.net>
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Unfortunate dynamic linking for everything
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:34:18 -0000
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:34:18 -0000

:GAD> Many freebsd users (me for one) are still living on a modem,
:GAD> where even one bump of 1.5 meg is a significant issue...
:GAD>
:GAD> Remember that the issue we're talking about is security
:GAD> updates, not full system upgrades.  "Everyone" would want
:GAD> the security updates, even if they're on a slow link.
:
:When security updates change but a few bytes, it seems that some
:xdiff- or rsync-like algorithm would be an apropriate way to
:distribute patches.
:
:
:Eddy
:--
:Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division

    Security updates are a red hearing regardless because they are few
    and far between compared to even a modem-user's bandwidth (especially
    those modem users who are likely to read the security lists aren't going
    to care if it takes an hour to download a non optimal binary patch if
    it only happens a few times a year).

						-Matt