Re: web updates that work with binary patches?
From: Jim McKay (no email)
Date: 02/27/05
- Next message: Doug Olson: "Re: web updates that work with binary patches?"
- Previous message: Hannes Danzl[NDD]: "Re: web updates that work with binary patches?"
- In reply to: Herbert Sitz: "Re: web updates that work with binary patches?"
- Next in thread: Herbert Sitz: "Re: web updates that work with binary patches?"
- Reply: Herbert Sitz: "Re: web updates that work with binary patches?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 27 Feb 2005 11:23:15 -0800
Herbert Sitz wrote:
><Jim McKay> wrote in message news:4222042b@newsgroups.borland.com...
>>
>> hmmm... I wonder if I'm missing something about this.
>>
>> What advantage is there w/a patcher as opposed to using
>> a PlugIn system? W/kbmMW, I use plugin as a service, and
>> it works very well. All these issues Lauchlan brings up
>> are handled cleanly w/PlugIn.
>>
>> This is one nice thing RO has out of the box w/Hydra.
>> Still, not so difficult building similar capability w/kbmMW.
>> I ended up settling on DragonSoft's tool, BTW.
>>
>> --
>> Regards:
>> Jim McKay
>>
>
>Jim -- Binary patches are a completely different issue from plugins.
>Both can be used to make updates smaller, but that's not generally
>the main motivation for plugins. Plugins solve other problems too
>and are more complicated to enable in your app. (Binary patching
>requires no changes to your basic app.) Morever, binary patches
>could be used even with plugins to make the plugin updates smaller.
ok, thanks. I've never looked into this, so I'll be anxious to
hear what you come up with.
>It's possible that through use of plugins you may find that you have
>no interest or need in doing binary patches. But binary patches
>could make even your plugin updates smaller, and plugins don't help
>much when what you want to do is update the main app.
actually, that's what I use them for.
>Curious how you're using "plugin as a service" with kbmMW? Do you
>mean that you always check on kbmMW server to see if newer version of
>plugin exists, and download it if there is newer version?
pretty much... In one app, kbmMW server checks my server for
updates, downloads & install's 'em through plugin architecture,
then server app updates it's clients the same way through a
kbmMW service.
>With binary patches you could just download a (smaller) binary
>patch for the plugin and apply it on the client. Depending on
>size of your plugins there may not be enough gain there to worry
about, >though.
I can see that. :)
In scenario I described above, however, the server deploys all
of it's client apps and tracks a bunch of other security related
things w/them as well. Having customer's server manage all the
updates gives them control over this, and in this case that's
where it belongs.
Patch size is not really an issue: organizing the various
packages was/is, and I'm still on a bit of learning curve w/that.
Which makes me wonder how/if these patching tools work w/runtime
packages (as opposed to 1 monolithic *.exe). (I don't know, just
wondering).
-- Regards: Jim McKay "My theory of evolution is that Darwin was adopted." -- Steven Wright Posted with XanaNews: Ver: 1.17.2.7
- Next message: Doug Olson: "Re: web updates that work with binary patches?"
- Previous message: Hannes Danzl[NDD]: "Re: web updates that work with binary patches?"
- In reply to: Herbert Sitz: "Re: web updates that work with binary patches?"
- Next in thread: Herbert Sitz: "Re: web updates that work with binary patches?"
- Reply: Herbert Sitz: "Re: web updates that work with binary patches?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
