deb822 format in /etc/apt/sources.list

[saturnian]

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

[sunrat]

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.

[saturnian]

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

[securitybreach]

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

[raymac46]

My old high school geometry teacher would call this "Compounding the Obvious." Must be something here I am not aware of....

[Bookmem]

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.

[raymac46]

Well my old geometry teacher also used to say "Like the little girl says, it all comes out to the same difference." 

[saturnian]

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.

[securitybreach]

I dunno but you do have a good point.

[saturnian]

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

[raymac46]

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

[saturnian]

I still haven't found any official documentation for this format except for what I see in man sources.list.

[raymac46]

Reviving this old thread. I just changed my Debian Testing install over to deb822 using the apt modernize command. Everything went OK except for the Google Earth repository which did not have proper signing/security as originally installed. Fixed this by removing and reinstalling Google Earth and then editing the google-earth-pro.sources file to remove a duplicate entry. Everything works OK now but I don't think I gained all that much. I only bothered to do this because I use the Thinkpad to keep up with all the developments in Debian.

[abarbarian]

As an ordinary person, looking at the old way, I find it takes a bit more effort to read the information and understand it quickly. The three line new way is much more clear with just one piece of information on each line.

The new way looks more like how this is done in the Arch pacman.conf.

[raymac46]

Probably it's worth it because of increased security over package installation. Most people won't care either way, especially if you are doing a new installation of Debian. It can cause some issues with a longer-standing install if you don't understand the process.