On 31 May 2018 at 20:59, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@redhat.com> wrote:
[..] 
What I wrote does not base on any assumption or guess.
And not malice but more likely IMO just plain (not intentional) mistake.
Why? Because:
a) To handle all Fedora repos dnf does not need depend on deltarpm. Fedora does not provide delta files at all. Nothing here changed recently. In't it?

Fedora has provided deltarpms in the repositories for many years. However, it only provides two per RPM: a delta from the one shipped at GA and a delta from the most recent one in updates-testing. So if you don't update frequently, you'll likely not see many of them. 

I'm upgrading rawhide on daily bases and rawhide does not have in the tree any drpm files :)

Just checked on few mirrors usual location of f28 updates (/pub/linux/dist/fedora/linux/updates/28/Everything/x86_64/drpms) and in this directory there are at the moment only 56 files from May 31 and nothing older. So not two drpm per RPM package but only generated files out of last batch of updates.

Nevertheless even f28 GA dnf by default has no enabled use drpm files (in dnf-conf package there is no in /etc/dnf/dnf.conf "deltarpm=1" line) so as long as someone consciously will not enable use this those files will be never used (I'm betting that it is ~+99% of all cases).
Because drpm directory provides only drpm files out of last batch of updates I'm guessing that dnf in case other updates will fallback to use regular packages from updates directory), and this is no one is screaming that something is wrong with drpm directory content. Am I correct? if not drpm/ content already may be broken (? .. but if ~no one is using this -> no one care (?))

Ergo: using use weak dependency between dnf and deltarpm looks like it is 100% correct (Q.E.D.)

kloczek
-- 
Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH