Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

added spec for opkg PURL type #279

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

oblivia-simplex
Copy link

I wrote up a spec for the opkg PURL type, which I think we should use as a root type instead of openwrt (which is currently stubbed out but not further specified in the packageurl-go repo, for example). I suggest letting openwrt act as a namespace for opkg PURLs, which is consistent with what the spec already has for apk PURLs, as explained in PURL-TYPES.rst.

apk

apk for APK-based packages:

  • There is no default package repository: this should be implied either from
    the distro qualifiers key or using a repository base url as
    repository_url qualifiers key.

  • The namespace is the vendor such as alpine or openwrt. It is not
    case sensitive and must be lowercased.

  • The name is the package name. It is not case sensitive and must be
    lowercased.

  • The version is a package version as expected by apk.

  • The arch is the qualifiers key for a package architecture.

  • Examples::

    pkg:apk/alpine/curl@7.83.0-r0?arch=x86
    pkg:apk/alpine/apk@2.12.9-r3?arch=x86
    

One potentially contentious detail in my opkg PURL spec is the qualifier key I called set, which corresponds to what opkg calls "repositories". I chose set as a name for this field rather that repository or repo to avoid confusion with the repository_url field. The "sets" in question, in the case of OpenWrt's opkg distribution, include

  • base
  • community-packages
  • luci
  • routing
  • telephony

The key set was chosen by analogy with OpenBSD's "sets" (collections of related packages, with names like "base", "game", "font", etc.). I'm not particularly wedding to this choice, though, and would welcome alternative suggestions.

@oblivia-simplex
Copy link
Author

Unrelatedly, I moved the qpkg section to its proper alphabetical place in the file.

@@ -556,7 +573,6 @@ Other candidate types to define:
- ``nim`` for Nim packages:
- ``nix`` for Nixos packages:
- ``opam`` for OCaml packages:
- ``openwrt`` for OpenWRT packages:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why?

@jkowalleck jkowalleck added Proposed new type and removed PURL type definition Non-core definitions that describe and standardize PURL types labels Oct 17, 2024
@johnmhoran johnmhoran added the type: opkg Proposed new type label Oct 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants