lib/repo: Add a new private API for bare content writes #1355
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This lowers into the commit core what the static delta code was doing, and improves the API. The bigger picture issue is that for writing large files, our current "pull" API where the caller provides a `GInputStream` is very awkward in some scenarios. For example, we have a whole "libarchive input stream" that is a ~200 line GObject that boils down to wrapping `archive_read_data()`. This came more to a head when I was working on rpm-ostree jigdo since I had to copy that object. One step we can take after this is to further split `write_content_object()` into a "write symlink or archive object" versus "write bare content object" (it already has a mess of conditionals) and teach the latter case to call this. The eventual goal here is to make this API public.
|
⚡ Test exempted: pull fully rebased and already tested. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This lowers into the commit core what the static delta code
was doing, and improves the API.
The bigger picture issue is that for writing large files, our current "pull" API
where the caller provides a
GInputStreamis very awkward in some scenarios.For example, we have a whole "libarchive input stream" that is a ~200 line
GObject that boils down to wrapping
archive_read_data().This came more to a head when I was working on rpm-ostree jigdo since I had to
copy that object.
One step we can take after this is to further split
write_content_object()into a "write symlink or archive object" versus "write bare content object"
(it already has a mess of conditionals) and teach the latter case to call
this.
The eventual goal here is to make this API public.