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

Re: Bug#481129: Bug#671503: general: APT repository format is not documented

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: