On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 7:21 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 19:18:15 +0200
drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 19:11:53 +0200
> > drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> That wasn't about "poor" as in slow vs. "great" as
in fast but
> >> bandwith capped vs. not.
> >>
> >> If building deltas are slow the solution is not to disable them
> >> but to find out why there are slow and fix that. One thing for
> >> instance is that it insists on generating the original rpm while
> >> creating an uncompressed rpm would save a compress + uncompressed
> >> cycle during updates (the former is a bit extensive for xz).
> >
> > I think It could avoid doing that if people didn't mind that it
> > couldn't be gpg checked.
>
> Well the delta files themselves could be signed no?
I do not think that would work, no.
Why?