<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Coding Relic - Latest Comments in Courgette binary compression</title><link>http://codingrelic.disqus.com/</link><description>Random Musings about Software in an Embedded World</description><atom:link href="https://codingrelic.disqus.com/courgette_binary_compression/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:32:50 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Courgette binary compression</title><link>http://codingrelic.geekhold.com/2009/07/courgette-binary-compression.html#comment-12742601</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Sure, and I don't intend to disparage Courgette in any way. This blog is about embedded systems, and I wanted to point out Courgette as an interesting technology for  making smaller incremental patches if that makes sense in your system. In the systems I've worked on, I'm not convinced that it does.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I think you're also meaning that my point about 2^N combinations isn't valid for Courgette, and that is a fair criticism. The patches would have to be applied in order.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">DGentry</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:32:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Courgette binary compression</title><link>http://codingrelic.geekhold.com/2009/07/courgette-binary-compression.html#comment-12741957</link><description>&lt;p&gt;No one said anything about independent patches, these are all incremental patches.  The binary diff stuff requires an exact matching baseline.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">wscott</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:15:41 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>