Re: Package file names
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 01:47:26PM +0200, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> Is it a technical requirement (of dpkg, apt, and/or dak), that packages be
> named ${pkgname}_${version}_${arch}.${ext} (${pkgname}_${version}.${ext} for
> source), or merely (or mostly) policy?
It's a technical requirement for apt and (to a somewhat lesser extent,
but still) the archive that names be unique. Other than that, nothing.
[...]
> But the package name, version, and architecture is of course written down in
> the various control files, and the file names are listed in the Packages and
> Sources files that apt downloads. So as long as name collisions can be
> avoided (for example in simple repositories holding just one version and
> architecture of a package at a time), the file name technically shouldn't
> matter, should it?
That's right. Try it:
cp /var/cache/apt/archives/aptitude_0.4.4-4_powerpc.deb ~/foo.deb
sudo dpkg -i ~/foo.deb
--
<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
-- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
Reply to: