Tiago Bortoletto Vaz writes:
> Hi all,
>
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 03:01:14PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> David Kalnischkies writes:
> [...]
>> >> For apticron: can this be worked around or maybe just document ways the
>> >> user can prevent it from happening?
>> > By popular depend (o
Hi all,
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 03:01:14PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> David Kalnischkies writes:
[...]
> >> For apticron: can this be worked around or maybe just document ways the
> >> user can prevent it from happening?
> > By popular depend (or by us for debugging proposes) is a littl
David Kalnischkies writes:
> Hi .*,
>
> 2010/4/28 Matt Taggart :
>> 2) diffutils and dash are "Priority: required"/"Essential: yes" in
>> unstable, but weren't in lenny.
> Every time we talk about the "problem" outlined here it boils down to:
> Why the user still have the (old)stable repository i
2010/4/29 Matt Taggart :
> 2) diffutils - This didn't exist as a binary package in stable, so there is
> nothing to install and put on hold.
You can put a hold even on a not installed package, so you can use a hold
also to prevent the installation of the package, not only the upgrade of the
package
2010/4/29 Matt Taggart :
> Can you think of another way that apticron could determine if things are
> needed?
That is the point: We disagree here if the listed packages are need or not.
In a complete upgraded stable from oldstable the old essentials are not
needed so they can be removed which apt
> We can argue now that mixed systems aren't supported, but in the
> middle of a dist-upgrade from old-stable to stable the system is also
> a mixed system -- and, if we really would not support it, why does the
> user have different archives in his sources?
I have often seen package maintainers s
> > If the user don't want to see it (s)he can e.g. put the not installed
> > package on hold and will be done with it?
>
> This does not seem to work in all cases. I've recently struggled with a
> system that was trying to remove or upgrade packages that I had
> explicitly set on hold immediately
2010/4/28 Toni Mueller :
> On Wed, 28.04.2010 at 21:14:52 +0200, David Kalnischkies
> wrote:
>> 2010/4/28 Matt Taggart :
>> > 2) diffutils and dash are "Priority: required"/"Essential: yes" in
>> > unstable, but weren't in lenny.
>> Every time we talk about the "problem" outlined here it boils do
Hi,
On Wed, 28.04.2010 at 21:14:52 +0200, David Kalnischkies
wrote:
> 2010/4/28 Matt Taggart :
> > 2) diffutils and dash are "Priority: required"/"Essential: yes" in
> > unstable, but weren't in lenny.
> Every time we talk about the "problem" outlined here it boils down to:
> Why the user still
Hi .*,
2010/4/28 Matt Taggart :
> 2) diffutils and dash are "Priority: required"/"Essential: yes" in
> unstable, but weren't in lenny.
Every time we talk about the "problem" outlined here it boils down to:
Why the user still have the (old)stable repository in his sources?
If (s)he has no package
10 matches
Mail list logo
