Changes from ubuntu 16.04 to 18.04

[unbeforkinglievable]

It seems that Bionic Beaver (18.04) requires more fields than Xenial (16.04) in the Packages.gz file...
This worked on Xenial:

Filename: dists/xenial/main/binary-amd64/<name>_<version>_amd64.deb
Size: <size>
MD5sum: <md5>
SHA1: <sha>
SHA256: <sha>

But does not work on Bionic; I added these lines to the extracted file at /var/lib/apt/lists/:

Package: <name>
Architecture: amd64
Version: <version>
Priority: standard
Description: <description>

And it worked fine.

This may be an issue with my debian packaging tool, not necessarily an issue with deb-simple, but just thought you might want to know.

[dig412]

@unbeforkinglievable I think this issue is fixed in master - all Packages files require those fields but deb-simple wasn't copying them in some cases depending on how the control file archive had been build.

This was fixed in #31 by kshvakov.

@esell Could you create a new release from master?

[esell]

@dig412, done! v1.4.1 was just published off of master.

[MikeCollinsOnt]

I'm using v1.4.1 and I'm still seeing this problem, on 18.04 (bionic) only.

When using curl to push the package in question to the repo, I do not get the message Found a package control file, which I do get from doing the equivalent on 16.04 (xenial)

[MikeCollinsOnt]

The above comment applies to a package I build on 18.04. If, instead, I:

• rebuild my "bionic" package on a 16.04 Docker image
• push the rebuilt package to the deb-simple repo in an 18.04 Docker image

then the control file is found, and the full package info is correctly entered into the Packages.gz file.

So... it seem as though there's something with the way packages are built in 18.04, that deb-simple isn't able to correctly read them. We're using the debhelper tools to build the package:

https://manpages.debian.org/testing/debhelper/index.html

[MikeCollinsOnt]

@esell Would it be more helpful if I submitted a new issue for this?

[dig412]

@MikeCollinsOnt Would you be able to build a test package on 18.04 and upload it somewhere for me to investigate with? The file contents don't matter - it's almost certainly an issue with the metadata.

[esell]

apologies on the delay folks. @MikeCollinsOnt, i think it is ok to just piggyback on this issue. if you want to post up the metadata files as @dig412 suggested that would help (gist, pastebin, etc).

[MikeCollinsOnt]

@esell @dig412 Thanks for the responses. I've not been able to get back to looking at this, but hopefully I'll get the opportunity to get something to you soon.