Hi, [please CC me, I'm not on the list]
> To install a package directly, with apt downloading any necessary > dependencies: > apt-get install rpmver-2.0-13498cl.i386.rpm Gustavo (maintainer of apt-rpm) has a version ready that supports http and ftp installs beside local files. This is nice and it's a feature I would love to see in debian apt (see #47379). And it's also nice for the various apt front-ends (like synaptic) to have a way to savely install local packages and get dependency resolution for that. They implement it with a special indexfile (rpmSinglePkgIndex is a subclass of the pkgIndexFile). Porting requires writing such a thing for deb packages. > There is something vague about improvements in the "upgrading > algorythm" that may or may not apply to us. I just did a (highly) unscientific test (apt-get dist-upgrade) with my (mostly) up-to-date unstable system: apt-rpm (version 0.5.15cnc3): ----------------------------------8<---------------------------------- The following packages will be upgraded libxft2 The following packages will be REMOVED: libxft2-dev The following NEW packages will be installed: libxft-dev ----------------------------------8<---------------------------------- debian apt (0.5.14): ----------------------------------8<---------------------------------- The following packages will be REMOVED: gnome-core-devel libatspi-dev libbonoboui2-dev libeel2-dev libgail-dev libgal2.0-dev libglade2-dev libglademm2.0-dev libgnome-desktop-dev libgnomecanvas2-dev libgnomeprint2.2-dev libgnomeui-dev libgtk2.0-dev libgtkhtml2-dev libgtkmm2.0-dev libgtksourceview-dev libnautilus2-dev libpango1.0-dev librsvg2-dev libvdk2-dev libvdkbuilder2-dev libxft2-dev libzvt2.0-dev vdkbuilder2 The following packages will be upgraded libxft2 ----------------------------------8<---------------------------------- So it looks like apt-rpm is doing pretty well (libxft-dev provides libxft2-dev so there is no need to remove all those pkgs) in this situation. > There is a bit about an apt shell which sounds mildly interesting. I like the apt-shell feature (IMHO it's a good mix between apt-get and higher level stuff like aptitude/synaptic) and I think we should have it as well. Porting it over to (debian) apt is easy, but it breaks the ABI as apt-shell uses new generic features from apt-rpm (I have a proof-of-concept patch ready). > At least the first three things I've mentioned above would be nice > features to have in debian. Not killer, but nice. Of course apt-rpm is > abranch/fork from out apt, so I wonder how long it will be before we > do.. There is some talk about merging between the projects (#207400). Actually is fairly easy to compile apt-rpm on a debian system (the diff is less than 500 lines). All there changes are either in the rpm/ subdir or generic and documented (and it looks like they don't break anything deb releated). bye, Michael -- Linux is not The Answer. Yes is the answer. Linux is The Question. - Neo
