On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 04:11:38PM +0200, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote: >> Pinning by source package would be really useful, because packages >> from the same source tend to require to be in sync.
> Actually, not. There is the not rare case that > architecture-independent packages has newer versions that > architecture-dependent ones. Yes, and if the packages must be in sync, this means the package is uninstallable (in unstable / experimental). But I don't see what this situation has to do with my request. If the unstable version of a package is uninstallable, then it is uninstallable. Not making the package easier to pin (by continuing to require several pin entries instead of one) is not being to solve that, or help or anything. Also, often, although not required, it is often desirable for the packages from the same source package to be in sync, e.g. a program and its documentation. > Do you still want pinning by source name? Yes, I would like it. > This would require having deb-src indexes all the time I don't understand this. "apt-cache show pkgname" shows me the source package of a package, so the information seems readily available. I assume that the way the priority of a (package,version) pair is computed is something like: put priority 500 loop over all pins if that pin matches the (package, version), assign priority given by pin end loop So one would need to change the "if that pin matches" to have a step like that pseudo-code: if ( current_pin.type == SOURCE_PIN && current_package.source.name == current_pin.package_name && /* rest of condition, like does the release / label / archive / ... match */ ) return true; > and more hacks in apt_preferences format... Yes, one would need a way to express that in the syntax of apt_preferences. How about "Source:" instead of "Package:"? -- Lionel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
