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

Re: queries about apt-ftparchive

On Tue, 25 May 2010 20:29:48 +0200
David Kalnischkies <kalnischkies+debian@gmail.com> wrote:

(thanks for the cc, i forgot to request it).

> Hi Karl,

sorry about the delay replying.

> 2010/5/24 Karl Goetz <karl@kgoetz.id.au>:
> > I have two questions I hope someone can help with. I can provide
> > more details if required. I'd like to say up front I /have/
> > attempted to read the documentation, and yes, I've tried to provide
> > patches where it seemed wrong [1].
> thanks for your try. It was not unnoticed, just until now uncomment,
> as i have myself no direct interest in apt-ftparchive and
> unfortunately nobody else feels responsible at all most of the
> time… :/

Not attempting to guilt trip - sorry if it came across that way.

> Most of your changes are okay on first glance, some can't be chanced
> easily (e.g. the default for config variables) but i will give it a
> closer look later.
> > == How can i get Packages/Contents files only containing the
> > specific architectures data? ==
> I suspect you are working with the lenny version?

yup. sorry, should have been more specific in the OP.

> If i am right dak uses a file list to achieve it, but the behavior you
> see is the default - i think it can be changed with a Filename Pattern
> in the settings, but i would need to look that up and i am short on
> time currently…

Strange default. It may not be worth finding the cause and documenting
if the new version changes the behaviour? If I have time I'll have a
quick look through the commit log for any obviously related changes.

> The version currently in experimental (or to be specific since
> 0.7.26~exp1) changes this behavior: It will work as (you) expected
> with your configuration. As 0.7.26 is a registered transition it will
> likely by included in squeeze, so time will fix it automatically. ;)

oh, sweet. I might rebuild it on stable for my use until squeeze

> > == Tree/BinDir structure repositories. ==
> I think i don't understand the question, but apt & co. are in general
> to common used to change behavior without years of deprecation,
> so i guess the support for both is just one of these features…

Thats what I guessed, but thought there might be deeper meaning ;)


> (the change above is only okay as tools using these files like APT
> ignore these "wrong" stanzas anyway - at least as long as APT can't
> handle MultiArch which slowly changes ;) )
> Best regards,
> David Kalnischkies

Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
No, I won't join your social networking group

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: