saturnian Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Has anybody here tried using the deb822 format in the /etc/apt/sources.list file (Debian, Ubuntu, etc.)? Quote This is a new format supported by apt itself since version 1.1. Previous versions ignore such files with a notice message as described earlier. It is intended to make this format gradually the default format, deprecating the previously described one-line-style format, as it is easier to create, extend and modify for humans and machines alike especially if a lot of sources and/or options are involved. Developers who are working with and/or parsing apt sources are highly encouraged to add support for this format and to contact the APT team to coordinate and share this work. Users can freely adopt this format already, but may encounter problems with software not supporting the format yet. - https://manpages.debian.org/buster/apt/sources.list.5.en.html I've haven't tried it out, but maybe it's time to get on board with it. Looks like Ubuntu has already switched to this format as of 20.10. More info: - https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man5/deb822.5.html - https://www.techrepublic.com/index.php/article/how-to-use-the-new-deb822-apt-format-on-ubuntu/ - https://repolib.readthedocs.io/en/latest/deb822-format.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunrat Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 First I heard of it. Certainly it's not in Testing or Unstable Debian yet. Looks simple enough but less simple than the single-line format which I have never had problems with. I guess it must solve some mysterious niche issues that us plebs would not ever encounter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saturnian Posted March 31, 2021 Author Share Posted March 31, 2021 1 hour ago, sunrat said: First I heard of it. Certainly it's not in Testing or Unstable Debian yet. Looks simple enough but less simple than the single-line format which I have never had problems with. I guess it must solve some mysterious niche issues that us plebs would not ever encounter. Well, I quoted from Buster manpages, and it says it's been supported by apt since version 1.1, so looks like it can be used in Testing and Unstable. I don't see info abut the deb822 format at the Debian wiki, though. It was mentioned a few years back at the Debian User Forums: http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?t=138415 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
securitybreach Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Is there a benefit or is this just change for the sake of change? I do not see how changing from one line to multiple lines helps any. One of the links mention that it would make it easier to be readable by humans or machines but really it just complicates the simple method that worked for decades. Just my opinion 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raymac46 Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 My old high school geometry teacher would call this "Compounding the Obvious." Must be something here I am not aware of.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bookmem Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 2 hours ago, raymac46 said: My old high school geometry teacher would call this "Compounding the Obvious." Must be something here I am not aware of.... I think your geo teach would file it under "The average propensity to change". People who have been dealing with single line for years, will see no need to change. But for new comers, having consistent line breaks could make it easier to check for typos. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raymac46 Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 Well my old geometry teacher also used to say "Like the little girl says, it all comes out to the same difference." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saturnian Posted March 31, 2021 Author Share Posted March 31, 2021 9 hours ago, securitybreach said: Is there a benefit or is this just change for the sake of change? I do not see how changing from one line to multiple lines helps any. One of the links mention that it would make it easier to be readable by humans or machines but really it just complicates the simple method that worked for decades. Just my opinion Yeah, looking at the "Disadvantages" (of the old way) section (third link, above), I'm thinking that the deb822 format probably won't be all that helpful for your average desktop user. Not sure about that, though. It does look like somebody thinks it's a better idea, and that it isn't simply change for the sake of change. Maybe those who are using the new format are finding that they like it better. It seems to be easier to understand at a glance than the old one-line format, don't you think? When I get the chance, I'm gonna test it out on one of my Bullseye installations. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
securitybreach Posted April 1, 2021 Share Posted April 1, 2021 I dunno but you do have a good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saturnian Posted April 1, 2021 Author Share Posted April 1, 2021 (edited) Tested this out in Debian Bullseye (testing). Here are the lines I've been using in my old /etc/apt/sources.list file (now /etc/apt/sources.list-bkup) : deb https://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security bullseye-security main contrib non-free deb https://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates main contrib non-free And here's the contents of the new /etc/apt/sources.list.d/debian.sources file: Types: deb URIs: https://deb.debian.org/debian Suites: bullseye bullseye-updates Components: main contrib non-free Types: deb URIs: http://security.debian.org/debian-security Suites: bullseye-security Components: main contrib non-free Two sections instead of three lines. Seemed to work fine when I ran sudo apt update. This might not be such a bad change. Edited April 1, 2021 by saturnian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raymac46 Posted April 1, 2021 Share Posted April 1, 2021 I guess this is how you would do it for Google Chrome: X-Repolib-Name: Google Chrome Enabled: yes URIs: http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb Suites: stable Components: main Architectures: amd64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saturnian Posted April 1, 2021 Author Share Posted April 1, 2021 I still haven't found any official documentation for this format except for what I see in man sources.list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.