Thanks! Yes, that's essentially what I'm after. I don't have an "apt.preferences" file... I'll generate one as you suggest. I read what docs. I found on the "apt.preferences" file, and couldn't figure out how it would fix my priority problem with the CD-ROM for the stable release, since the CD-ROM entries are first in order in the "sources.list" file, which from what I could tell was supposed to guarantee their priority. (I already stumbled over the cache limit problem and fixed that, but the "APT::Default-Release "stable";" entry, which I also tried, caused a "Bad syntax at end of apt.conf" file error (I'll go recheck the syntax *again*...).
Thanks again -- that gives me some new tactics to employ... On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 20:14:05 -0500, "Jacob S." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 17:15:13 -0700 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Well, yes, I had read that... several times. (Not that the answer > > may not be in there and I'm staring right at it and not seeing it, > > *but...*). > > > > I'm able to make "apt-get" work from either CD-ROM or from the > > archive. I've got all the entries for the CD-ROM and the archives > > correct. The problem is whether or not it's possible to rearrange > > "apt-get"'s priorities for how it selects packages and dependencies. > > > > One quote from the document you pointed at, is what I'd mentioned > > earlier: > > > > "It's important to note that APT always looks for the most recent > > versions of packages. Therefore, if your /etc/apt/sources.list > > were to list an archive that had a more recent version of a package > > than the version on the CD, APT would download the package from > > there." > > > > The thing is, what I *want* it to do, in a case where I'm just > > trying to load something initially and get it running, is to go get > > whatever it can find from the stable distribution on the CD-ROM, to > > start with. Then if I don't like that, or whatever it is doesn't > > work, I want to point it at an upgrade on a distribution archive. > > But the behavior (as the above quote suggests) seems to be that it > > will go for the most recent version no matter what. > > Hello, > > If I'm understanding you properly, you want apt-pinning to work with 4 > repositories: 1) CDs, 2) stable on debian.org servers, 3) testing on > debian.org server and 4) unstable on debian.org servers. > > You'll need an /etc/apt/preferences file, if you don't have one already. > Here's how I had it set for using Woody with an occasional package from > Testing and Unstable: > > Package: * > Pin: release a=stable > Pin-Priority: 900 > > Package: * > Pin: release a=testing > Pin-Priority: 60 > > Package: * > Pin: release a=unstable > Pin-Priority: 60 > > You can also set the following line in /etc/apt/apt.conf, but I didn't > find it essential when I was using it: > > APT::Default-Release "stable"; > > You will probably want to set the following line in /etc/apt/apt.conf as > well, to avoid apt-get segfaulting during an update. > > APT::Cache-Limit 10000000; > > This should now give you only packages from stable (Woody), unless you > ask for something different. It should also get Woody's packages off the > CDs instead of the internet whenever possible. However, keep in mind > that a lot has changed in Woody since it was first released, so if your > cds are very old it may not use them much. > > Also, there were a couple of large library upgrades between Woody and > Sarge (testing), such as libc6. This may make it so that you can't > install that neat package you want from Sarge until you upgrade libc6 > and a few other related packages, making for a large download. (There is > a library for libc6 to have backwards compatability, however, so you > shouldn't have to worry about that part.) > > Finally, if you use "apt-get -t release install packagename" (where > release is testing or unstable, and packagename is the name of the > package you want to install), instead of "apt-get packagename/release", > it will download the needed dependencies from the same release as > packagename, instead of downloading the package and using dependencies > from your old release. This can be both good and bad, depending on your > circumstances, but most often it's good. > > HTH & HAND, > Jacob > > -- > GnuPG Key: 1024D/16377135 > > Random .signature #20: > Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates. > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
