Re: Outside of Debian (Re: Package splitting and upgrades)
Lex Spoon <lex@cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
[setting up your own APT repository]
> I have no idea how you worked it out in 15 minutes. It took me
> something like 3-4 hours to put 5 packages plus source into an
> apt-get-able repository. It's not well documented, and it doesn't
> really make sense to me.
[...]
I'd say 30 minutes with sources.list(5), dpkg-scanpackages(1) and
dpkg-scansources(1), or 10 minutes with (groups.)google.com, eg. it
is documented (in German) in the debian-user-german-FAQ
http://www.sylence.de/dudfaq/ _if_ you want to publish only for one
architecture and can live with a flat directory-layout. You do not
need to separate binary-all and binary-{i386,arm, ...} and component
in apt sources.list is optional, too:
cd /dir/with/debs/and/sources
dpkg-scanpackages . /dev/null | gzip -9 > Packages.gz
dpkg-scansources . | gzip -9 > Sources.gz
Line for apt-get:
deb http://path/to/dir/with/debs/and/sources/ ./
deb-src http://path/to/dir/with/debs/and/sources/ ./
or deb http://path/to/dir/ with/debs/and/sources/
> Lots of the layout still seems odd to me. Why is there one level of
> categorization, followed by division by architecture, and then a second
> level of categorization?
Probably tradition, the directory layout on the debian-mirrors is
older than apt (at least the location of Packages.gz)
> Architecture either first or last would make
> more sense. Also, why does there *have* to be an override file, if I
> don't want to override anything?
Use /dev/null as override.
> The tools support is very limited. dpkg-scanpackages and
> dpkg-scansources are okay, but they, too, took some fiddling:
[...]
Are you looking for apt-ftparchive(1)?
cu andreas
--
Unofficial _Debian-packages_ of latest _tin_
http://www.logic.univie.ac.at/~ametzler/debian/tin-snapshot/
Reply to: