Anthony Towns writes:
> [1 ]
> On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 11:00:14PM +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 19, 1999 at 09:43:57PM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > > Why not allow Source only packages ?
> > That will win nothing. You can't use apt-get on them, have to rebuilt
> > and have them twice locally.
>
> $ apt-get source -b foo # to get source and build
>
> There isn't a `get source, build and install' option afaik; and
> build-depends aren't implemented yet; but still.
>
> There's no reason why you can't store just the rebuilt .deb or just
> the source locally, either, afaict.
>From man apt-get:
source source causes apt-get to fetch source packages. APT
will examine the available packages to decide which
source package to fetch. It will then find and
download into the current directory the newest
available version of that source package. Source
packages are tracked separately from binary pack
agesviadeb-srctypelinesin the
/etc/apt/sources.list file. This probably will
mean that you will not get the same source as the
package you have installed or as you could install.
If the --compile options is specified then the
package will be compiled to a binary .deb using
dpkg-buildpackage, if --download-only is specified
then the source package will not be unpacked.
-
So
apt-get --compile source
will download, and compile the package. Adding a --install also
shouldn´t be too hard (or a install-source).
Source dependencies are implemented as warnings only, but that could
be changed easily as well. If you find a package wthout source
dependencies that would need any make a diff and report that as bug.
May the Source be with you.
Goswin
