apt.git - Saurik's version of apt managed for tvOS/ARM64

Age	Commit message (Collapse)	Author
2015-11-05	drop privileges in copy:// method as we do for file://	David Kalnischkies
	Continueing on the track of dropping privileges in all methods, lets drop it in copy, too, as the reasoning for it is very similar to file and the interaction between the too quiet interesting as copy kinda surfed as a fallback for file not being able to read the file. Both now show a better error message as well as it was previously claiming to have a hashsum mismatch, given that it couldn't read the file. Git-Dch: Ignore
2015-11-04	support arch:all data e.g. in separate Packages file	David Kalnischkies
	Based on a discussion with Niels Thykier who asked for Contents-all this implements apt trying for all architecture dependent files to get a file for the architecture all, which is treated internally now as an official architecture which is always around (like native). This way arch:all data can be shared instead of duplicated for each architecture requiring the user to download the same information again and again. There is one problem however: In Debian there is already a binary-all/ Packages file, but the binary-any files still include arch:all packages, so that downloading this file now would be a waste of time, bandwidth and diskspace. We therefore need a way to decide if it makes sense to download the all file for Packages in Debian or not. The obvious answer would be a special flag in the Release file indicating this, which would need to default to 'no' and every reasonable repository would override it to 'yes' in a few years time, but the flag would be there "forever". Looking closer at a Release file we see the field "Architectures", which doesn't include 'all' at the moment. With the idea outlined above that 'all' is a "proper" architecture now, we interpret this field as being authoritative in declaring which architectures are supported by this repository. If it says 'all', apt will try to get all, if not it will be skipped. This gives us another interesting feature: If I configure a source to download armel and mips, but it declares it supports only armel apt will now print a notice saying as much. Previously this was a very cryptic failure. If on the other hand the repository supports mips, too, but for some reason doesn't ship mips packages at the moment, this 'missing' file is silently ignored (= that is the same as the repository including an empty file). The Architectures field isn't mandatory through, so if it isn't there, we assume that every architecture is supported by this repository, which skips the arch:all if not listed in the release file.
2015-11-04	disable updating insecure repositories in apt by default	David Kalnischkies
	apt is an interactive command and the reasons we haven't this option set for everything is mostly in keeping compatibility for a little while longer to allow scripts to be changed if need be.
2015-11-04	refer to apt-secure(8) in unsecure repositories warning	David Kalnischkies
	The manpage is also slightly updated to work better as a central hub to push people from all angles into the right directions without writting a book disguised as an error message.