[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Debian-cd and new sections



Hi all,

 I'm working on a custom debian and I'm having some problems with it....

 First of all, I tried to make a "default" debian image. Downloaded
the mirror, included the doc and tools directories, made a default
debian-installer with some custom udebs and that worked perfectly.

 After it, I tried to include a new section to my local mirror:

  -$MIRROR/pool-company
 (local where the .deb packages are located)
 -$MIRROR/dists/sarge/company/
 (where the files Packages, Packages.gz, Packages.bz2 and Release are located)

 But it seems that debian-cd tool, by default, just get packages from
the sections main and contrib. There is a variable on CONF.sh that
seems to merge packages from the non-free section too (when you set
NONFREE=1) but any other section will be just ignored.

 Because this work is really urgent, I left these two new sections for
a future work (probably modify the debian-cd scripts) and included the
packages developed by us in the contrib section. To that, I used a
script (http://www.libertasbr.org.br/documentacoes/desenvolvimento/libertasbr/como-gerar-cdd.pdf
pages 5 to 10) which will refresh the packages indices.

 This script will modify the $MIRROR/dists/sarge/Release file fields
and it will complain about the wrong signature... so, the problem is:
Is there a way to modify a default section like main or contrib, add
or delete packages from them without having a GPG problem?

 It will also be problematic on generating the CD. Debian-cd won't
complain about anything and the image will boot and install the first
stage perfectly. But it will not show all the default options on
tasksel (it only shows "message server" and "web server" options and
doesn't show the "desktop" tasksel, for example). And even when I
choose one those, its packages will not be "signed", which I think it
could be a problem with that Release file.

 Any help on it would be really appreciated....  :)

 Thank you....

 Daniel



Reply to: