| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
| |
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The parser creates a preferences as well as an extended states file
based on the EDSP scenario file, which isn't the most efficient way of
dealing with this as thes text files have to be parsed again by another
layer of the code, but it needs the least changes and works good enough
for now. The 'apt' solver is in the end just a test solver like dump.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Gbp-Dch: ignore
Reported-By: g++ -Wsuggest-override
Thanks: g++ -Wsuggest-override
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Now that we can dynamically create dependencies and provides as needed
rather than requiring to know with which architectures we will deal
before running we can allow the listparser to parse all records rather
than skipping records of "unknown" architectures.
This can e.g. happen if a user has foreign architecture packages in his
status file without dpkg knowing about this architecture (or apt
configured in this way).
A sideeffect is that now arch:all packages are (correctly) recorded as
available from any Packages file, not just from the native one – which
has its downsides for the resolver as mixed-arch source packages can
appear in different architectures at different times, but that is the
problem of the resolver and dealing with it in the parser is at best a
hack (and also depends on a helpful repository).
Another sideeffect is that his allows :none packages to appear in
Packages files again as we don't do any kind of checks now, but given
that they aren't really supported (anymore) by anyone we can live with
that.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Trade deduplication of code for a bunch of new virtuals, so it is
actually visible how the different indexes behave cleaning up the
interface at large in the process.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Sources are usually defined in sources.list (and co) and are pretty
stable, but once in a while a frontend might want to add an additional
"source" like a local .deb file to install this package (No support for
'real' sources being added this way as this is a multistep process).
We had a hack in place to allow apt-get and apt to pull this of for a
short while now, but other frontends are either left in the cold by this
and/or the code for it looks dirty with FIXMEs plastering it and has on
top of this also some problems (like including these 'volatile' sources
in the srcpkgcache.bin file).
So the biggest part in this commit is actually the rewrite of the cache
generation as it is now potentially a three step process. The biggest
problem with adding support now through is that this makes a bunch of
previously mostly unusable by externs and therefore hidden classes
public, so a bit of further tuneing on this now public API is in order…
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
C++11 adds the 'override' specifier to mark that a method is overriding
a base class method and error out if not. We hide it in the APT_OVERRIDE
macro to ensure that we keep compiling in pre-c++11 standards.
Reported-By: clang-modernize -add-override -override-macros
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Doing this disables the implicit copy assignment operator (among others)
which would cause hovac if used on the classes as it would just copy the
pointer, not the data the d-pointer points to. For most of the classes
we don't need a copy assignment operator anyway and in many classes it
was broken before as many contain a pointer of some sort.
Only for our Cacheset Container interfaces we define an explicit copy
assignment operator which could later be implemented to copy the data
from one d-pointer to the other if we need it.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
To have a chance to keep the ABI for a while we need all three to team
up. One of them missing and we might loose, so ensuring that they are
available is a very tedious but needed task once in a while.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is mainly visible in the policy, so that you can now pin by b= and
let it only effect Packages files of this architecture and hence the
packages coming from it (which do not need to be from this architecture,
but very likely are in a normal repository setup).
If you should pin by architecture in this way is a different question…
Closes: 687255
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We used to read the Release file for each Packages file and store the
data in the PackageFile struct even through potentially many Packages
(and Translation-*) files could use the same data. The point of the
exercise isn't the duplicated data through. Having the Release files as
first-class citizens in the Cache allows us to properly track their
state as well as allows us to use the information also for files which
aren't in the cache, but where we know to which Release file they
belong (Sources are an example for this).
This modifies the pkgCache structs, especially the PackagesFile struct
which depending on how libapt users access the data in these structs can
mean huge breakage or no visible change. As a single data point:
aptitude seems to be fine with this. Even if there is breakage it is
trivial to fix in a backportable way while avoiding breakage for
everyone would be a huge pain for us.
Note that not all PackageFile structs have a corresponding ReleaseFile.
In particular the dpkg/status file as well as *.deb files have not. As
these have only a Archive property need, the Component property takes
over this duty and the ReleaseFile remains zero. This is also the reason
why it isn't needed nor particularily recommended to change from
PackagesFile to ReleaseFile blindly. Sticking with the earlier is
usually the better option.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We have a bunch of classes which are of no use for the outside world,
but were still exported and so needed to preserve ABI/API. Marking them
as hidden to not export them any longer is a big API break in theory,
but in practice nobody is using them – as if they would its a bug.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Strings like Section names or architectures are needed vary often.
Instead of writing them each time we need them, we deploy sharing for
these special strings. Until now, this was done with a linked list of
strings in which we would search, which was stored in the cache.
It turns out we can do this just as well in memory as well with a bunch
of std::map's.
In memory means here that it isn't available anymore if we have a partly
invalid cache, but that isn't much of a problem in practice as the
status file is compared to the other files we parse very small and includes
mostly duplicates, so the space we would gain by storing is more or less
equal to the size of the stored linked list…
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We had a wild mixture of (unsigned) int, long and long long here without
much sense, so this commit adds a few typedefs to get some sense in the
typesystem and ensures that a ID isn't sometimes computed as int, stored
as long and compared with a long long… as this could potentially bite us
later on as the size of the archive only increases over time.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Git-Dch: Ignore
Reported-By: gcc -Wsuggest-attribute={pure,const,noreturn}
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Beside being a bit cleaner it hopefully also resolves oddball problems
I have with high levels of parallel jobs.
Git-Dch: Ignore
Reported-By: iwyu (include-what-you-use)
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Reported-By: gcc -Wunused-parameter
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
change at the time of writing the strings, so first store it temporary
and then save the index in the (possibily new) pointer location
|
| |
|
|
| |
- check with RealFileExists for scenario file as otherwise a directory
like one provided with RootDir triggers the usage of EDSP
|
| |
|
|
| |
(and be it if it tries to announce that…)
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
The breakage is just to big for now, so guard the change with
#ifndef APT_8_CLEANER_HEADERS and be nice to library users
|
| |
|
| |
- implement a ModificationTime method for FileFd
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
just writing stuff… it also reads and can work for both:
- APT talking to an external solver
- an external solver (understanding EDSP) talking to APT
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|
|
based on a very early draft for EDSP by Stefano
APT can now write a scenario as well as load most stuff from it.
|
