Re: Bug#481129: Bug#671503: general: APT repository format is not documented
- To: Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org>
- Cc: "deity@lists.debian.org" <deity@lists.debian.org>, "481129@bugs.debian.org" <481129@bugs.debian.org>, "671503-submitter@bugs.debian.org" <671503-submitter@bugs.debian.org>, "debian-devel@lists.debian.org" <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>, "663174@bugs.debian.org" <663174@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: Re: Bug#481129: Bug#671503: general: APT repository format is not documented
- From: Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org>
- Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 14:00:22 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20120519135807.GA6788@debian.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org>, "deity@lists.debian.org" <deity@lists.debian.org>, "481129@bugs.debian.org" <481129@bugs.debian.org>, "671503-submitter@bugs.debian.org" <671503-submitter@bugs.debian.org>, "debian-devel@lists.debian.org" <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>, "663174@bugs.debian.org" <663174@bugs.debian.org>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAKTje6GW9k_p_7Ch-kZWnSXNpiwdbs3hXu1Cyw_QjMGaYDh_ng@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <[🔎] 1337254452-sup-8697@virtual.ruk.cuni.cz> <[🔎] 20404.62666.335641.126171@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <[🔎] 1337260034-sup-4991@virtual.ruk.cuni.cz> <[🔎] 87mx55lqbo.fsf@frosties.localnet> <[🔎] 20406.11351.808519.174392@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <[🔎] 20120518133148.GA20358@debian.org> <[🔎] 20120518144017.GA21269@debian.org> <[🔎] 1337349939-sup-8754@virtual.ruk.cuni.cz> <[🔎] 20120518185407.GA15468@debian.org> <[🔎] CAKTje6GW9k_p_7Ch-kZWnSXNpiwdbs3hXu1Cyw_QjMGaYDh_ng@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 07:38:59AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 12:58 AM, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
>
> > What's the opinion about the flat repository format, where you
> > just have one directory with Release, Packages, Sources, and
> > friends and no sub-directories?
> >
> > Should they be documented as well then? We would then have two
> > kind of documented repository formats:
> >
> > 1. Debian-style, with a pool (or similar) and a dists directory
> > 2. Flat-style, with just one directory
> >
> > This should cover everything we currently support. Although I don't
> > know much about how much stuff we support in flat directories WRT
> > Translation, Contents, and diffs.
>
> I would like to see the flat-style repository documented too, since
> some of the derivatives in the Debian derivatives census use it and I
> would like to lint their apt repositories.
I added (and others edited formatting a bit)
= Flat Repository Format =
A flat repository does not use the {{{dists}}} hierarchy of directories,
and instead places meta index and indices directly into the archive root
(or some part below it) In sources.list syntax, a flat repository is specified
like this:
{{{
deb uri directory/
}}}
Where {{{uri}}} specifies the archive root, and {{{directory}}} specifies the
position of the meta index and the indices relative to the archive root. In
Flat repositories, the following indices are supported:
* Packages (under the location {{{directory/Packages}}})
* Sources (under the location {{{directory/Sources}}})
!InRelease, Release, Release.gpg meta-information are supported as well. Diffs,
Translations, and Contents indices are not defined for that repository format.
Indices may be compressed just like in the standard Debian repository format.
--
Julian Andres Klode - Debian Developer, Ubuntu Member
See http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode and http://jak-linux.org/.
Reply to: