Le 12/01/2016 23:14, Niels Thykier a écrit :
> Please have a look at:
>
> * man apt-file
> * The example config in /usr/share/doc/apt-file/examples
>- Let me know if they work for you or not.
Yes, it works. Many thanks.
I did not know the "#clear" directive but I added one more:
#clear APT:
Marvin Renich:
> * Vincent Danjean [151208 03:17]:
>> [...]
>>
>> I use "apt-file search" very sporadically. And even when I use it,
>> most of the time, it is to find a package containing a header file,
>> so I do not need its database to be up-to-date. So I update it only
>> when the result fr
On 14154 March 1977, Paul Wise wrote:
>> http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/dists/experimental/main/Contents-source.diff/>
>>
>> They now appear.
> Thanks, there are still some missing though:
> testing main/contrib/non-free
> unstable/experimental contrib/non-free
They get generated whenever there
On Sat, 2015-12-12 at 23:22 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/dists/experimental/main/Contents-source.diff/
>
> They now appear.
Thanks, there are still some missing though:
testing main/contrib/non-free
unstable/experimental contrib/non-free
--
bye,
pabs
https://
On 14153 March 1977, Paul Wise wrote:
> Looks like Contents-source.diffs don't exist on the mirrors, filed a
> bug against ftp.d.o:
> http://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/unstable/main/Contents-source.diff/ (404)
> https://bugs.debian.org/807727
http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/dists/experimental/mai
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 12:38 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> This works perfectly for binary packages' Contents, but (at least on my
> machine) APT downloads whole Contents-source every time.
>
> There's clearly a bug somewhere (APT? dak?), but I don't have time to debug
> it further. I very rarely need C
* David Kalnischkies [151208 07:36]:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 10:32:52AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > ]] Marvin Renich
> > > * Tollef Fog Heen [151207 00:17]:
> > > > ]] David Kalnischkies
> > > > > [And before someone complains about PDiff being slow in apt based on
> > > > > some years
(adding the missing reference to online resources)
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 01:35:59PM +0100, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> messups without hashsums and pdiffs currently haven't [0], but if we
[0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-dak/2015/08/msg00012.html and my
followup https://lists.debian.org/debi
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 09:16:33AM +0100, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> Le 06/12/2015 13:01, David Kalnischkies a écrit :
> > On Sat, Dec 05, 2015 at 07:58:07AM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> >> Will it still be possible to update just the apt-file index, separately
> >> from updating the main package ind
On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 08:50:55AM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2015-12-06 at 07:01, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 05, 2015 at 07:58:07AM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> > (as I am sightly lying, it is actually possible – just not very
> > accessible for a user and it would have issues
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 10:32:52AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> ]] Marvin Renich
> > * Tollef Fog Heen [151207 00:17]:
> > > ]] David Kalnischkies
> > > > [And before someone complains about PDiff being slow in apt based on
> > > > some years old experience: The PDiff handling was changed nea
* Tollef Fog Heen [151208 04:33]:
> ]] Marvin Renich
> > I set Acquire::Pdiffs::FileLimit "3"; and have been much happier. Why
> > this (or something near this) wasn't the default from the start, I don't
> > know. The current default is an extremely poor choice. Perhaps someone
> > should file
* Vincent Danjean [151208 03:17]:
> Le 06/12/2015 13:01, David Kalnischkies a écrit :
> > You can't update individual indexes at the moment. The question is why
> > you would want to as from my point of view that was a pretty annoying
> > technical detail that I had to run two (or three [debtags]
]] Marvin Renich
> * Tollef Fog Heen [151207 00:17]:
> > ]] David Kalnischkies
> >
> > > [And before someone complains about PDiff being slow in apt based on
> > > some years old experience: The PDiff handling was changed nearly two
> > > years ago… – and apt-file was using PDiffs before alrea
Le 06/12/2015 13:01, David Kalnischkies a écrit :
> On Sat, Dec 05, 2015 at 07:58:07AM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
>> Will it still be possible to update just the apt-file index, separately
>> from updating the main package index? I see no indication in the current
>> apt(8) man page of a way to tel
* Tollef Fog Heen [151207 00:17]:
> ]] David Kalnischkies
>
> > [And before someone complains about PDiff being slow in apt based on
> > some years old experience: The PDiff handling was changed nearly two
> > years ago… – and apt-file was using PDiffs before already, so no real
> > change there
]] David Kalnischkies
> [And before someone complains about PDiff being slow in apt based on
> some years old experience: The PDiff handling was changed nearly two
> years ago… – and apt-file was using PDiffs before already, so no real
> change there]
Does this mean apt now will only download a
On Sun, 06 Dec 2015 20:17:32 +, Niels Thykier wrote:
> >> * /var/cache/apt-file will disappear
> >>- command-not-found and dh-make-perl are known consumers
> > What would you recommend as a replacement? Parse the output from
> > 'apt-file search'?
> I presume there is a reason these tool
On 2015-12-06 at 18:23, Russ Allbery wrote:
> The Wanderer writes:
>
>> I'm not sure I'm happy about such an important change in the
>> behavior of the core binary of one package being (able to be) made
>> by an update to a completely different package, and I certainly
>> wouldn't have been happ
The Wanderer writes:
> I'm not sure I'm happy about such an important change in the behavior of
> the core binary of one package being (able to be) made by an update to a
> completely different package, and I certainly wouldn't have been happy
> to discover it after the fact by seeing 'apt-get up
On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 07:44:34PM +, Niels Thykier wrote:
> James McCoy:
> > On Sat, Dec 05, 2015 at 12:39:36PM +, Niels Thykier wrote:
> >> * Personal caches have been removed (-c)
> >>- apt-venv creates files that uses that option
> >
> > Why not set Dir::Cache to ~/.cache/apt when
On 2015-12-06 at 15:30, Russ Allbery wrote:
> The Wanderer writes:
>
>> $ apt-cache policy apt-file
>> apt-file:
>> Installed: 2.5.4
>> Candidate: 2.5.4
>> Version table:
>> *** 2.5.4 0
>> 500 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ stable/main amd64 Packages
>> 500 http://ftp.us
The Wanderer writes:
> $ apt-cache policy apt-file
> apt-file:
> Installed: 2.5.4
> Candidate: 2.5.4
> Version table:
> *** 2.5.4 0
> 500 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ stable/main amd64 Packages
> 500 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing/main amd64 Packages
>
Damyan Ivanov:
> -=| Niels Thykier, 05.12.2015 12:39:36 + |=-
>> In the new version of apt-file (currently in experimental), we have
>> changed/removed some features that will affect some packages. Packages
>> listed below are BCC'ed to this mail.
>>
>> Notably:
>>
>> * /var/cache/apt-file wi
James McCoy:
> On Sat, Dec 05, 2015 at 12:39:36PM +, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> In the new version of apt-file (currently in experimental), we have
>> changed/removed some features that will affect some packages. Packages
>> listed below are BCC'ed to this mail.
>>
>> Notably:
>>
>> *
On 2015-12-06 at 11:46, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * The Wanderer , 2015-12-06, 08:50:
>
>> Er... the entire reason I started running 'apt-file update' in the
>> first place is because running 'apt-get update' was not, or did
>> not appear to be, updating the index which was used by apt-file.
>
> Quick
* The Wanderer , 2015-12-06, 08:50:
Er... the entire reason I started running 'apt-file update' in the
first place is because running 'apt-get update' was not, or did not
appear to be, updating the index which was used by apt-file.
Quick sanity check: do you have apt-file (>= 3) installed?
Bec
* David Kalnischkies , 2015-12-06, 13:01:
APT 1.1 is pretty clever in figuring out if a file was changed and for
the 'giant' Contents files it actually benefitial to run the update
more often as that means it can use the small PDiff files (a few KB
each) to patch up a previous version of the fi
-=| Niels Thykier, 05.12.2015 12:39:36 + |=-
> In the new version of apt-file (currently in experimental), we have
> changed/removed some features that will affect some packages. Packages
> listed below are BCC'ed to this mail.
>
> Notably:
>
> * /var/cache/apt-file will disappear
>- co
On Sat, Dec 05, 2015 at 12:39:36PM +, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the new version of apt-file (currently in experimental), we have
> changed/removed some features that will affect some packages. Packages
> listed below are BCC'ed to this mail.
>
> Notably:
>
> * /var/cache/apt-file w
On 2015-12-06 at 07:01, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 05, 2015 at 07:58:07AM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
>> Will it still be possible to update just the apt-file index,
>> separately from updating the main package index? I see no
>> indication in the current apt(8) man page of a way to t
On Sat, Dec 05, 2015 at 07:58:07AM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 2015-12-05 at 07:39, Niels Thykier wrote:
> > * "apt-file update" will become a thin call to "apt update"
> >- live-build uses this in a hook
>
> Will it still be possible to update just the apt-file index, separately
> from u
Vincent Danjean:
> Le 05/12/2015 13:58, The Wanderer a écrit :
>> On 2015-12-05 at 07:39, Niels Thykier wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In the new version of apt-file (currently in experimental), we have
>>> changed/removed some features that will affect some packages. Packages
>>> listed below are BC
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Certainly, I have reserved -I as a short hand of --index-names, so it
> will be "apt-file -I dsc ...".'
Ok, -s would be easier but I guess I can make do.
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Paul Wise:
> On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 8:39 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
>
>> * The full list of known incompatibilities is in the changelog[1]
>
> - Special uses of "-a" to search in Source packages or
>udebs have been replaced by "--index-names".
>
> Would it be possible to get a `-a so
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Le 05/12/2015 13:58, The Wanderer a écrit :
> On 2015-12-05 at 07:39, Niels Thykier wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In the new version of apt-file (currently in experimental), we have
>> changed/removed some features that will affect some packages. Package
On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 8:39 PM, Niels Thykier wrote:
> * The full list of known incompatibilities is in the changelog[1]
- Special uses of "-a" to search in Source packages or
udebs have been replaced by "--index-names".
Would it be possible to get a `-a source` to map to `--index-n
On 2015-12-05 at 07:39, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In the new version of apt-file (currently in experimental), we have
> changed/removed some features that will affect some packages. Packages
> listed below are BCC'ed to this mail.
>
> Notably:
> * "apt-file update" will become a thin cal
38 matches
Mail list logo
