Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

apt-build packages: is there option to replace them with the ones from official repo?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    [SOLVED] apt-build packages: is there option to replace them with the ones from official repo?

    Just as a learning experience, in my system, I replaced a few packages from the official repository with apt-build (apt-built install "package"). These are the packages:
    acpi-support 0.144+aptbuild1 amd64 scripts for handling many ACPI events
    acpid 1:2.0.33-1ubuntu1+aptbuild1 amd64 Advanced Configuration and Power Interface event daemon
    alsa-base 1.0.25+dfsg-0ubuntu7+aptbuild1 all ALSA driver configuration files
    alsa-utils 1.2.6-1ubuntu1+aptbuild1 amd64 Utilities for configuring and using ALSA
    bash 5.1-6ubuntu1+aptbuild2 amd64 GNU Bourne Again SHell
    bash-completion 1:2.11-5ubuntu1+aptbuild1 all programmable completion for the bash shell
    busybox-initramfs 1:1.30.1-7ubuntu3+aptbuild1 amd64 Standalone shell setup for initramfs
    dash 0.5.11+git20210903+057cd650a4ed-3build1+aptbuild1 amd64 POSIX-compliant shell
    i965-va-driver:amd64 2.4.1+dfsg1-1+aptbuild1 amd64 VAAPI driver for Intel G45 & HD Graphics family
    init 1.62+aptbuild1 amd64 metapackage ensuring an init system is installed
    init-system-helpers 1.62+aptbuild1 all helper tools for all init systems
    initramfs-tools 0.140ubuntu13+aptbuild7 all generic modular initramfs generator (automation)
    initramfs-tools-bin 0.140ubuntu13+aptbuild7 amd64 binaries used by initramfs-tools
    initramfs-tools-core 0.140ubuntu13+aptbuild7 all generic modular initramfs generator (core tools)
    libdrm-amdgpu1:amd64 2.4.110-1ubuntu1+aptbuild1 amd64 Userspace interface to amdgpu-specific kernel DRM services -- runtime
    libdrm-common 2.4.110-1ubuntu1+aptbuild1 all Userspace interface to kernel DRM services -- common files
    libdrm-intel1:amd64 2.4.110-1ubuntu1+aptbuild1 amd64 Userspace interface to intel-specific kernel DRM services -- runtime
    libdrm-nouveau2:amd64 2.4.110-1ubuntu1+aptbuild1 amd64 Userspace interface to nouveau-specific kernel DRM services -- runtime
    libdrm-radeon1:amd64 2.4.110-1ubuntu1+aptbuild1 amd64 Userspace interface to radeon-specific kernel DRM services -- runtime
    libdrm2:amd64 2.4.110-1ubuntu1+aptbuild1 amd64 Userspace interface to kernel DRM services -- runtime
    libntfs-3g89 1:2021.8.22-3ubuntu1+aptbuild2 amd64 read/write NTFS driver for FUSE (runtime library)
    lilo 1:24.2-5.1+aptbuild1 amd64 LInux LOader - the classic OS boot loader
    linux-sound-base 1.0.25+dfsg-0ubuntu7+aptbuild1 all base package for ALSA and OSS sound systems
    ntfs-3g 1:2021.8.22-3ubuntu1+aptbuild2 amd64 read/write NTFS driver for FUSE
    qdirstat 1.8-1+aptbuild1 amd64 Qt-based directory statistics
    x11-common 1:7.7+23ubuntu2+aptbuild1 all X Window System (X.Org) infrastructure
    x11-utils 7.7+5build2+aptbuild1 amd64 X11 utilities
    x11-xkb-utils 7.7+5build4+aptbuild1 amd64 X11 XKB utilities
    x11-xserver-utils 7.7+9build1+aptbuild1 amd64 X server utilities
    xinit 1.4.1-0ubuntu4+aptbuild1 amd64 X server initialisation tool
    xinput 1.6.3-1build2+aptbuild1 amd64 Runtime configuration and test of XInput devices
    xorg-sgml-doctools 1:1.11-1.1+aptbuild1 all Common tools for building X.Org SGML documentation
    xserver-common 2:21.1.3-2ubuntu2+aptbuild2 all common files used by various X servers
    xserver-xorg 1:7.7+23ubuntu2+aptbuild1 amd64 X.Org X server
    xserver-xorg-core 2:21.1.3-2ubuntu2+aptbuild2 amd64 Xorg X server - core server
    xserver-xorg-input-libinput 1.2.1-1+aptbuild1 amd64 X.Org X server -- libinput input driver
    zip 3.0-12build2+aptbuild1 amd64 Archiver for .zip files
    People say apt-build packages are optimized for the specific hardware and perform better. While it may be the case, I don't see any perceivable difference. So, is there a way to replace the above apt-build packages with the ones from official repository? Because, I presume I've to build them again to update them, and I don't like to invest time or effort for no perceivable benefit.
    On a side note, I must say, the recompiled kernel (with all the firmware and drivers built into it) on my system was worth the time and effort in terms of disk footprint and overall responsiveness.
    Optimized Kernel
    Is the same mileage possible with application packages compiled by apt-build? I'm ready to devote time and effort if someone shares me resources to properly apt-build (similar to tweaking kernel using localyesconfig and then manually tweaking a dozen other parameters with menuconfig). For example, I want to remove some features from an application make it light and fast. Is it doable? If yes, how difficult it is?
    Last edited by manmath; May 04, 2022, 11:23 PM.

    #2
    Have you ever considered using Gentoo? It is designed exactly for things like this. It can be done in Ubuntu but it is not inherent in its design. I have found in recent years, even on Gentoo, that unless you are using very old hardware (10 years+), have very little ram, or limited hard drive space, there is not really any benefit to compiling your own kernel. Even now in Gentoo, I just use the stock kernel binaries that are precompiled like any other distro. Most of it is modular nowadays and it only take seconds for the kernel to detect hardware and load the appropriate drivers. Any other drivers could be loaded from /etc/module.d directory conf files.
    I have never even considered modifying software found in the Debian/Ubuntu type repositories. Other than possible smaller file sizes, thereby saving small amounts of RAM on load, I can't see the overall benefit. I do seem to remember once, Kubuntu's VLC was accidentally compiled without a codec or feature and users were resorting to compiling it themselves with the option that was left out enabled. It was eventually fixed in the next VLC update.
    I am not trying to discourage you from what you are doing. It is all about choice. However, I think you should consider Gentoo as it is specifically caters to this sort of customization.
    As far as reinstalling the default ones, can you not just go through them in Synaptic and find the matching repository entries and mark them as install, and mark the apt-build version of same software as remove and hit apply? (by right clicking or left clicking on the package it will bring up a sub menu). It should then explain it is going to remove the apt-build versions and install the repository versions. And possibly they should be conflicting, so if you try to install the repo's version, then it might say it is uninstalling the apt-build version, but I don't know. You would have to try it with one package first.

    Good Luck!

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by rab0171610 View Post
      As far as reinstalling the default ones, can you not just go through them in Synaptic and find the matching repository entries and mark them as install, and mark the apt-build version of same software as remove and hit apply?
      Thanks for your suggestions. I replaced one package at a time. It did throw some error, but the final 'apt install -f' fixed the packages. Now every package is from the repo. I may try gentoo on a separate disk, but not now. Now it's all good with Kubuntu.

      Comment


        #4
        Great!! Glad you got it working back to the way it was!

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by manmath View Post
          I may try gentoo on a separate disk, but not now.
          I've got gentoo in the same btrfs as Kubuntu, though originally I didn't install it that way. Gentoo being gentoo, I expect one could install it into a subvolume if one knew how.
          Regards, John Little

          Comment


            #6
            I used Gentoo as my daily driver for several years, and I loved the absolute control it gave over what was very much my system. But it is very labour intensive - a bit like owning a classic car. You end up spending a lot of time with your head under the hood....

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by jlittle View Post
              I expect one could install it into a subvolume if one knew how.
              Perfect. I've always believed the spirit of "Less is More". Time intensive it is. But rewarding too! Kubunti being my daily driver and an able fallback option, it's only a matter of time to try something new.

              Comment

              Working...
              X