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

Re: apt-ftparchive alternatives (was: Hard Rust requirements from May onward)



Am Mon, Nov 03, 2025 at 05:56:32PM +0000, schrieb Jeremy Stanley:
> On 2025-11-03 13:22:28 +0100 (+0100), David Kalnischkies wrote:
> > apt-ftparchive, an aging tool, which as far as I know sees its only
> > serious usage by your employer in the form of Launchpad, right?
> 
> A quick sidebar: what more modern alternatives do folks recommend? For years
> (decades?) I've used apt-ftparchive release, followed by gpg --clear-sign of
> InRelease, for a quick command-line solution to create small personal
> secure-APT compatible Debian package repositories. Is there something else
> similarly simple these days?

fwiw I wasn't saying that people have to stop using, nor that it will
disappear any time soon. It is too useful for src:apt for testing –
and just like src:apt also includes an HTTP server that I constantly
use in place of `python -m http.server`, it's not particular hard to
keep `apt-ftparchive` around for personal use. Just don't expect that
any development that is not directly motivated by testing/personal
usage will happen or that it will get somehow "user-friendly".


But apt-ftparchive has the option to use BDB (= Berkeley DB) for caching
and while I still believe it wouldn't be too hard to change to another
DB (minus the probably hard part of vacillating a transition), I don't
see it happen any time soon. At least I don't see why I should do it &
so did nobody else in the last 12 years [0]  (also: #1119193).


That said, by all means, feel free to seek and use alternatives.
I am not able to offer any advice through.
Just trying to clarify the status of it, as I see it,
to avoid misunderstandings.


Best regards

David Kalnischkies

[0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/07/msg00132.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: