| 1 |
On Thursday 18 July 2002 16:44, Yannick Koehler wrote: |
| 2 |
> On July 18, 2002 09:39 am, Michael Cummings wrote: |
| 3 |
> Well the idea was the following, If I build a package for my computer and |
| 4 |
> could make other benefit from the fact that I've done so and someone maybe |
| 5 |
> doing the exact same thing, so instead of having it re-compile the same |
| 6 |
> things in the same way he could just pick up mine. If you do not have |
| 7 |
> common system then you don't benefit from it but you don't lose anything. |
| 8 |
> It is an addition not a removal. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> That's why I was putting talk about a peer-to-peer system. It would be |
| 11 |
> nice that in some way, if want to emerge a build that has been emerged |
| 12 |
> already on another system using the same configuration then you could at |
| 13 |
> your choice decide not to re-do it but take the one that has been done. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> It does imply trust, security issues and all of this, but that is also true |
| 16 |
> whenever you compile source code that you didn't investigate yourself |
| 17 |
> anyway even thought there's a digest file, that file may have been created |
| 18 |
> or modified on the mirror to make you download malicious source code. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Appart from the trust issue, the major problem is comparing the two systems. |
| 21 |
It is unlikely they are exactly the same. But even if they are, it is a hell |
| 22 |
of a job finding out. The only way such a distribution for binaries works is |
| 23 |
with a binary only distribution like,..... (you know who). |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Paul |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 29 |
Junior Researcher |
| 30 |
Mail: pauldv@××××××.nl |
| 31 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives