<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title><![CDATA[Quicker, more efficient updates]]></title>
    <link>http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/item/11000/</link>
    <description><![CDATA[There should be a more efficient format for apt-get (or the update manager) to download updates. Firstly, it should only need to download the files that have changed in a package (not the whole package), and secondly, it should download a DIFF of those files.<br /><br />My latest update contains a 34.2 WHOPPING MB update to the linux restricted modules. Here's the changelog:<br /><br />* Fix broadcom Makefile to get correct objects from split-module.<br /><br />I'm downloading 34.2Mb just to get a *Makefile update*??? I don't even use any broadcom stuff. Even if I did, I probably wouldn't care enough about a Makefile to make it worthwhile downloading 34.2Mb!<br />
<br />


<b>[539 votes] Solution #1: Auto-generated solution of idea #11000</b>
<br />

<br />
<br />



]]></description>

    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 20:27:05 +0000</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 14:03:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>QAPoll module</generator>
    <guid isPermaLink="true">http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/11000/</guid>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from droetker</title>
  <description><![CDATA[dupe of Idea 13.<br />http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/13]]></description>
  <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 20:34:17 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from Tree MendUs</title>
  <description><![CDATA[It is possible to choose not to download any particular update.<br />I agree that the current system looks inefficient.<br />And your solution is good.<br /><br />It would also cut down on bandwidth, and server loads, at both Ubuntu and Ubuntu users' ISPs.]]></description>
  <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:55:48 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from magnet14</title>
  <description><![CDATA[+1 for downloading only changed files<br /><br />And cutting down on bandwidth would be good if you must pay for every MB/GB]]></description>
  <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:09:52 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from Sidney</title>
  <description><![CDATA[Concerning your example: The makefile update means that the whole package was built again with the new makefile and _that_ is your update. The makefile itself is pretty useless with pre-built binaries.]]></description>
  <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:08:03 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from chipbennett</title>
  <description><![CDATA[Yes, this is a great idea.<br /><br />However, it is the ELEVENTH duplicate of Idea #13:<br />http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/13/report_duplicate/<br /><br />That said, I think the author of Idea #13 really needs to edit the idea to add more relavent keywords/tags so that the idea is more searchable by those keywords/tags.]]></description>
  <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 15:24:07 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from bryhoyt</title>
  <description><![CDATA[droetker & chipbennett, thanks very much for finding the dupes. You're right -- this is the eleventh duplicate.<br /><br />Developers, are you listening? This means people really want this!!<br /><br />Tree MendUs, you're right -- you can choose not to download any particular update, but it's not possible to ignore it permanently. Next time you open the updates window, it'll be selected again.<br /><br />Furthermore, I like to keep my system fully up-to-date, no matter how little I need or want a particular update. If updates were 10Kb rather the 10Mb, it would help immensely.<br /><br />Sidney, true, the Makefile means the whole build changed. But still: the build probably only changed by a few Kb (if not merely a few bytes -- just guessing).]]></description>
  <pubDate>Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:35:19 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from origin415</title>
  <description><![CDATA[Especially bad with OpenOffice changes.<br />+1<br /><br />]]></description>
  <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from gutnov</title>
  <description><![CDATA[One of the most important things to be implemented!<br />+1]]></description>
  <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:04:37 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from urandom</title>
  <description><![CDATA[Firefox and Apple updates use 'bsdiff' to send binary data and patch those bad applications. Ubuntu and/or Debian should seriously consider using it as well.]]></description>
  <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:20:44 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from kizza</title>
  <description><![CDATA[Latest changelog for linux-headers:<br /> * Fixed hppa FTBS by adding ABI files from -19.33.<br /><br />For me this is 26MB, and I don't have a HPPA processor!<br />def +1]]></description>
  <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:52:42 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from Auzy</title>
  <description><![CDATA[Apparently there is debdelta too (as discussed in the original idea), which debian has used for ages.<br />]]></description>
  <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:46:31 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from yussri</title>
  <description><![CDATA[this is life saving idea especially for us that still using dial up connections ]]></description>
  <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 12:21:08 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from jeanpaul145</title>
  <description><![CDATA[Even though I like this idea, I think that getting it to work will be tricky since it would have to be changed upstream as well (as in, with Debian and other Debian-based distro's). And getting that through will take time, patience, blood, sweat, a sore throat (interpret that however you like ;) and coding skills.]]></description>
  <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 12:58:45 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from edajai</title>
  <description><![CDATA[If some ubuntu-developer is reading this, please seriously consider proposing this for the next UDS. We need to implement this for 9.10 atleast if not 9.04, as this is the only area Ubuntu realy lacks behind Opensuse]]></description>
  <pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 06:39:07 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
        <item>
  <title>Comment from nickpick</title>
  <description><![CDATA[This sounds good, but I doubt that we'll see it any time soon.]]></description>
  <pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 14:03:12 +0000</pubDate>
</item>
      </channel>
</rss>
