On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 11:15:39AM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 12:46:27PM +0100, Michael Vogt wrote: > > I attached a patch against apt-0.5.14 that makes local installs > > possible. It's proof-of-concept for now and has a _ugly_ hack in > > it when generating the tagfile for the given debian package. > > Nothing that can't be fixed, I just wanted to post it as it is so we > > can start discussing how to improve it. > > > > It's very much inspired by how apt-rpm does it. It works for local > > .deb files only for now. Apt-rpm has support for build-dep, source, > > http and ftp too. We can add this later once the patch is cleaned up. > > > > I don't know if the patch will break the ABI. I add a new > > debSinglePkgIndex class in deb/debindexfile.h > > Thanks for the patch. If it's going to call out to dpkg, I think it should > definitely use popen or fork/exec rather than system() and a temporary file, > but that's easy to fix.
Thanks for your reply. It really shouldn't call dpkg that way. This was the "_ugly_ hack" I talked about when I first send in the patch. It was just a proof-of-concept and the easiest way for me to get the required information. This is the relevant part: + // create file fd + FileFd Pkg(FieldsFile,FileFd::ReadOnly); + + debListParser Parser(&Pkg); We need a FileFd that contains the needed tags. In what way we obtain the tags is irrelevant of course. I hope we find a better way than the above for this :) > The changes to srcrecords.cc and apt-get.cc seem unrelated; were they > intentional? srcrecords.cc is in by accident. The apt-rpm version can do stuff like: % apt-get build-dep apt-listchanges-1.49-11104cl.src.rpm which I didn't tackled. I'm not entirely sure about apt-get.cc. I think it was needed, but I can retest it. thanks, Michael -- Linux is not The Answer. Yes is the answer. Linux is The Question. - Neo
