Re: Huge private Debian repository...
Am Donnerstag, den 31.08.2006, 13:02 +0200 schrieb Antonio Ospite:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:24:08 +0200
> "Andreas Fester" <Andreas.Fester@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > Antonio Ospite wrote:
> > [...]
> > > debpool is also a handy alternative for a private repository:
> > >
> > > http://packages.debian.org/experimental/devel/debpool
> > >
> > > with some improvement debpool can be _the_ debian repository
> > > manager for mortals :)
> >
> > I made some improvements to debpool (not forwarded to "upstream" yet),
> > see http://littletux.homelinux.org/debian/pool/main/d/debpool/
> >
> > Among them are FAM support for a more responsive incoming queue
> > and support for multi arch repositories (especially handy for
> > i386/amd64).
> >
> > Things on my todolist are alignment with 0.2.3, optional GAMIN-support
> > instead of FAM and discussing my modifications with the original
> > author ;-)
> >
>
> Well, since debpool wants to keep dependencies at minimum I do not know
> if upstream author will accept your FAM support, let's try.
>
> As for multi arch repository I think it is a really good thing.
>
> Other features I miss from debpool are:
> - minimal pool tree (patch in BTS)
> - use of gpg-agent instead of keeping passphrase on fs (patch in BTS)
> - a command to delete packages from the repository
> (e.g.: debpool -d package_name)
>
> With those little changes it will be perfect for me :)
Short question: Do you know, that debarchiver and debpool developers and
users had a private discussion round initiated by Andreas Paculat about
the missing features and differences between both programs, which would
perfectly round out each other? If you were not part (which seems, when
I look at the thread), do you want a copy (I can send you the thread)? I
would really love to see a product, which includes the advantages of
both applications.
Regards, Daniel
Reply to: