On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 01:46:20AM +0000, Carlos Sousa wrote: > On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 22:57:31 -0800 Ross Boylan wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 02:14:17AM +0000, Carlos Sousa wrote: > > > > > > You can do 'apt-cache policy | less' and check that the priorities > > > assigned to the various sources are the ones you think you've specified. > > > I once had a syntax error in the preferences file and apt completely > > > disregarded the file. Possibly your case? > > Don't think so. apt-cache policy shows one unstable entry, priority > > 50. > > > > Maybe there is an upgrade that depends on an uninstalled package that > > is only in unstable. And then the presence of that package pulls in > > others? > > It also may be the case that the version in unstable is the same as the > version in testing, in which case apt-get will get the package from > either testing or unstable, since it's the same. > > Easy enough to check both theories. Do an 'apt-cache policy <package>' > for the packages that are being pulled from unstable, and check the > versions in either distribution. > > Cheers, > We have a winner. Every single package that I checked that apt-get -s said was from unstable had the same version in testing and unstable.
I'd almost file a wishlist bug about it, but as I recall there was quite a stack of more pressing issues for apt..... Thanks, Carlos. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
