On 04.04.2023 00:12, Thomas Schweikle wrote:
does not seen to work at all, since the 4.1-2 package has priority 500
but if pinning would work it should have 1000. What is wrong here?
It works for me.
Without pinning:
$ apt-cache policy nvidia-driver
nvidia-driver:
Installed: 470.161.03-1
On 2023-04-03 19:12 +, Thomas Schweikle wrote:
> I'd like to pin audacious to version 4.1. I've defined in
> /etc/apt/preferences.d/audacious.pref:
>
> Package: audacious*
> Pin: version 4.1*
> Pin-Priority: 1000
>
> Package: libaudcore5*
> Pin: version 4.1*
> Pin-Priority: 1000
>
> Package: l
On 03/04/2023 20:12, Thomas Schweikle wrote:
does not seen to work at all, since the 4.1-2 package has priority 500
but if pinning would work it should have 1000. What is wrong here?
Hi Thomas,
I don't remember how exactly pinning reads your preferences file, it's
been a while since I had a
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 03:46:17PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> I realize that Greg, but debian's support for armhf for unusual
> applications that require a realtime environment, is at its finest, an
> afterthought and discarded. We linuxcnc runners are used to it. So we
> build our own kernel
On Thursday 19 April 2018 14:59:04 Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 02:47:05PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Hijacking a thread here, but it reads like I might be reading an
> > expert.
> >
> > "Pinning" is an interesting subject Roberto, interesting because the
> > info on how to d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 02:59:04PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 02:47:05PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Hijacking a thread here, but it reads like I might be reading an expert.
> >
> > "Pinning" is an interesting subject Rob
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 02:47:05PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Hijacking a thread here, but it reads like I might be reading an expert.
>
> "Pinning" is an interesting subject Roberto, interesting because the info
> on how to do it is generally skipped over, or only mentioned in passing,
> with
Malte Forkel writes:
> Is there any support for pinning by architecture?
If you're speaking about libraries, you can write something like this:
Package: libgl1-mesa-glx
Pin: release n=wheezy
Pin-priority: 500
Package: libgl1-mesa-dri
Pin: release n=wheezy
Pin-priority: 50
Am 19.03.2014 00:39, schrieb John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell:
> "With the current version, apt would always try to install the newest
> version of a package which usually comes from unstable or testing -
> this could lead to a messed-up system. With apt-pinning, we can
> define priorities so t
On 2010-05-19 16:06 +0200, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 05:54:27PM -0500, Hugo Vanwoerkom
> was heard to say:
>> Sven Joachim wrote:
>> >>The following packages will be REMOVED:
>> >>... grub-legacy{a} ...
>
> [snip]
>
>> >>The following NEW packages will be installed:
>> >>
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 05:54:27PM -0500, Hugo Vanwoerkom
was heard to say:
> Sven Joachim wrote:
> >>The following packages will be REMOVED:
> >>... grub-legacy{a} ...
[snip]
> >>The following NEW packages will be installed:
> >>... grub-pc{a} ...
> >>
> >>So why does aptitude pay no attenti
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 06:00:32PM -0500, Hugo Vanwoerkom
was heard to say:
> Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > It looks to me like something else required grub-pc, and that in
> >turn forced grub-legacy to be removed. You could try pinning grub-pc
> >at a very low priority to see whether that helps, a
Freeman wrote:
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 10:32:36AM -0500, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
Hi,
(on Sid) I pinned grub-legacy, to avoid going to grub2.
Then when I do 'apt-get dist-upgrade' I see:
The following packages have been kept back:
grub
and
The following packages will be upgraded:
... grub-l
Daniel Burrows wrote:
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 10:32:36AM -0500, Hugo Vanwoerkom
was heard to say:
but when I do 'aptitude full-upgrade' I see:
The following packages will be REMOVED:
... grub-legacy{a} ...
and
The following NEW packages will be installed:
... grub-pc{a} ...
So why does apt
Sven Joachim wrote:
On 2010-05-15 17:32 +0200, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
(on Sid) I pinned grub-legacy, to avoid going to grub2.
Then when I do 'apt-get dist-upgrade' I see:
The following packages have been kept back:
grub
and
The following packages will be upgraded:
... grub-legacy ...
but
Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Sat,15.May.10, 10:32:36, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
Hi,
(on Sid) I pinned grub-legacy, to avoid going to grub2.
[...]
So why does aptitude pay no attention to my pin?
Please post the output of 'apt-cache policy grub'.
h...@debian:~$ apt-cache policy grub
grub:
In
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 10:32:36AM -0500, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> Hi,
>
> (on Sid) I pinned grub-legacy, to avoid going to grub2.
>
> Then when I do 'apt-get dist-upgrade' I see:
>
> The following packages have been kept back:
> grub
>
> and
>
> The following packages will be upgraded:
> ..
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 10:32:36AM -0500, Hugo Vanwoerkom
was heard to say:
> but when I do 'aptitude full-upgrade' I see:
>
> The following packages will be REMOVED:
> ... grub-legacy{a} ...
>
> and
>
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> ... grub-pc{a} ...
>
> So why does aptitu
On 2010-05-15 17:32 +0200, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> (on Sid) I pinned grub-legacy, to avoid going to grub2.
>
> Then when I do 'apt-get dist-upgrade' I see:
>
> The following packages have been kept back:
> grub
>
> and
>
> The following packages will be upgraded:
> ... grub-legacy ...
>
> but w
On Sat,15.May.10, 10:32:36, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> Hi,
>
> (on Sid) I pinned grub-legacy, to avoid going to grub2.
[...]
> So why does aptitude pay no attention to my pin?
Please post the output of 'apt-cache policy grub'.
Regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and dev
On Thursday 17 September 2009 12:05:32 Preston Boyington wrote:
> I have a laptop that functions 'just right' hardware wise so I have no
> interest in upgrading the compiled kernel (2.6.26 I believe), xorg, or
> rhythmbox (11.6).
>
> I am looking into apt pinning for the first time and while I'm re
> [...]
> t60[~]$ cat /etc/apt/preferences
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=lenny
> Pin-Priority: 900
>
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=sid
> Pin-Priority: 300
>
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=experimental
> Pin-Priority: 101
>
> [...]
As Osamu pointed out you are using codenames. However I thought t
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. a écrit :
> In <20090331142022.ga12...@osamu.debian.net>, Osamu Aoki wrote:
>> It is tricky but apt-pin only works with
>> testing/stable/unstable/experimental/... suite names.
>
> Technically,
> release a=
> matches any package where its repository's Release file has:
> Sui
In <20090331142022.ga12...@osamu.debian.net>, Osamu Aoki wrote:
>It is tricky but apt-pin only works with
>testing/stable/unstable/experimental/... suite names.
Technically,
release a=
matches any package where its repository's Release file has:
Suite:
It's just that the Release files in the off
Hi,
It is tricky but apt-pin only works with
testing/stable/unstable/experimental/... suite names.
You are using codename.
See
http://people.debian.org/~osamu/pub/getwiki/html/ch03.en.html#tweakingcandidateversion
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 10:05:09AM -0400, Luis Finotti wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am tr
On Monday 28 April 2008 11:03:53 am lostson wrote:
> Hello
> I have read some stuff about pinning in Debian is it possible to say pin a
> application from testing or unstable on Etch. For instance say I want to
> have the newest version of qt4 instead of what is in stable. Is this
> possible ? Or
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 01:03:53PM -0500, lostson wrote:
>
> Hello
> I have read some stuff about pinning in Debian is it possible to say
> pin a application from testing or unstable on Etch. For instance say
> I want to have the newest version of qt4 instead of what is in
> stable. Is this
Florian Kulzer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 20:12:34 +0200, Stefan Bellon wrote:
> > This results in the following output:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] apt-cache policy libstdc++6
> > libstdc++6:
> > Installed: 4.1.1-11
> > Candidate: 4.1.1-11
> > Package pin: 4.1.1-11
> > Version table:
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 20:12:34 +0200, Stefan Bellon wrote:
> Florian Kulzer wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:44:10 +0200, Stefan Bellon wrote:
>
> > > I have put the following in /etc/apt/preferences:
> > >
> > > Package: libstdc++6
> > > Pin: version 4.1.1-11
> > > Pin-Priority: 1001
>
Florian Kulzer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:44:10 +0200, Stefan Bellon wrote:
> > I have put the following in /etc/apt/preferences:
> >
> > Package: libstdc++6
> > Pin: version 4.1.1-11
> > Pin-Priority: 1001
> >
> > But then, when trying to do an update from within aptitude, it still
>
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:44:10 +0200, Stefan Bellon wrote:
> Because of Debian bug 386121
> (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=386121) I cannot
> update to a later version of libstdc++6 than 4.1.1-11 and need to
> "hold" this package version. In the past I just didn't update at all
> [My problem was being unable to set up a local repository with pinning]
As far as I'm concerned, this was a trememndous feat of collaborating to
save a poor sap some serious chunks of time.
Exactly both of these things mentioned below were the problem. Even with
this advice, it still took me q
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:45:06 -0400, Ryan King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On glumble.example.net, I have:
> /etc/apt/sources.list
> deb http://apt.example.net binary/
> # ... normal repo's
> /etc/apt/preferences
> Package: *
> Pin: release o=Example
>
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 11:45:06AM -0400, Ryan King wrote:
> I am working on a project where we need to maintain several deployments of
> our code. I want to set up a repostory so we can:
> - Package our main code up as a .deb
> - Package CPAN modules up that don't already have .deb's
>
On Friday March 19 at 11:33pm
"Pedro M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> and I read from Synaptic
Use apt-get.
--
-johann koenig
Now Playing: Anti-Flag - A Start : Underground Network
Today is Pungenday, the 5th day of Discord in the YOLD 3170
Celebrate Mojoday
My public pgp key: http://mental-graf
Johann Koenig escribió:
On Monday March 15 at 01:48pm
"Pedro M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How to say to Debian I prefer install Mozilla -unstable and not
Mozilla -testing ( only this package in unstable).
In /etc/apt/apt.conf
APT::Default-Release "testing";
In /etc/apt/preferences
Packag
On Tuesday March 16 at 12:43am
"Pedro M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, for installing mozilla browser 2:1.6-3 (unstable) instead of
> 2:1.5-3 (testing ) I have to add in this etc/apt/preferences
>
> Package: mozilla
> Pin: version 2:1.6-3*
> Pin-Priority: 1001
>
> ??
man apt_preferences
--
Johann Koenig escribió:
On Monday March 15 at 01:48pm
"Pedro M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How to say to Debian I prefer install Mozilla -unstable and not
Mozilla -testing ( only this package in unstable).
In /etc/apt/apt.conf
APT::Default-Release "testing";
I have it in this file. So,
On Monday March 15 at 01:48pm
"Pedro M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How to say to Debian I prefer install Mozilla -unstable and not
> Mozilla -testing ( only this package in unstable).
In /etc/apt/apt.conf
APT::Default-Release "testing";
In /etc/apt/preferences
Package: gaim
Pin: version 1:0.5
On Thursday 01 January 2004 12:01, Steinar Bang wrote:
> Mine look like this. It seems to be working. I've no idea why
> (pinning is a mystery to me):
Hm, it seems like it will remain a mystery to me as well... It seems to
work now, after I installed the python packages apt insisted had to
com
On Thursday 01 January 2004 12:01, Steinar Bang wrote:
> Mine look like this. It seems to be working. I've no idea why
> (pinning is a mystery to me):
>
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=testing
> Pin-Priority: 990
Oh, ok, that would make some sense, since 990 is above the default pin,
it could hav
> Kjetil Kjernsmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> So, now my preferences look like:
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=unstable
> Pin-Priority: 99
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=testing
> Pin-Priority: 550
Mine look like this. It seems to be working. I've no idea why
(pinning is a mystery to me):
Pack
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 10:10:37AM -0200, Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra wrote:
> Em Thu, 04 Dec 2003 09:47:21 -0500, Rich B escreveu:
>
> > One of my servers is running stable, but I've added Unstable
>
> If you *really, really* want to do it, there is a section on
> running mixed
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 03:50:17PM -0700, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 04:28:28PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:48:39 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > >
> > > Don't pin between stable and anything newer, or you'll end up just
> > > having some serious casc
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 04:28:28PM -0500, Paul Morgan wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:48:39 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> >
> > Don't pin between stable and anything newer, or you'll end up just
> > having some serious cascading dependencies that will result in you
> > running testing or unstable i
On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:48:39 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 09:47:21AM -0500, Rich B wrote:
>> What did I do wrong? I thought my Pin-prioritys would prevent anything
>> from upgrading to Sid unless I explicitly asked for i
Em Thu, 04 Dec 2003 09:47:21 -0500, Rich B escreveu:
> One of my servers is running stable, but I've added Unstable
If you *really, really* want to do it, there is a section on
running mixed distributions in the apt HOWTO manual.
--
Leandro GuimarÃes Faria Corsetti Dutra <[EMAIL PROTEC
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 09:47:21AM -0500, Rich B wrote:
> What did I do wrong? I thought my Pin-prioritys would prevent anything
> from upgrading to Sid unless I explicitly asked for it.
Don't pin between stable and anything newer, or you'll end up j
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 09:47:21AM -0500, Rich B wrote:
> One of my servers is running stable, but I've added Unstable to my
> /etc/apt/sources file, and in /etc/apt/preferences I put:
>
> Package: *
> Pin: release stable
> Pin-priority: 900
>
> Package: *
> Pin: release testing
> Pi
On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 09:47, Rich B wrote:
> One of my servers is running stable, but I've added Unstable to my
> /etc/apt/sources file, and in /etc/apt/preferences I put:
[snip pinned stable,testing and unstable]
Before you go down this road, be aware that pinning is almost certainly
a bad idea
On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 04:47:40PM -0500, Mike Mestnik wrote:
> I'm using pinning and I can't find ought how to use dselect to select
> packages that should track unstable. I would also like to select
> packages that, if able, should track testing/stable.
>
> Is there another gui that might deal
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:06:48 -0600 Ryan Walters wrote:
> ...
> No, I installed woody's apt, and apt-utils first, as I did read that
> potato's apt didn't do pinning.
>
> You're right though, I'm don't think I'll bother with a mixed system,
> too much hassle. One thing I know will work fine, is us
Ryan Walters wrote:
The reason, is that I have an old laptop that runs perfectly well in X
with potato. The minute I upgrade to a later distribution, X is
completely not usable no matter what window manager I choose.
However, running potato by itself means I can't run most of the
software out the
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:21:29 +0100, you wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 10:00:11 -0600 Ryan Walters wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:29:49 +0100, you wrote:
>>
>> >On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:24:54 -0600 Ryan Walters wrote:
>> >> Hi, I've been trying to figure this out for a few days now, and can't
>> >>
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 10:00:11 -0600 Ryan Walters wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:29:49 +0100, you wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:24:54 -0600 Ryan Walters wrote:
> >> Hi, I've been trying to figure this out for a few days now, and can't
> >> seem to get it to work. I want to pin not based on [
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 11:29:49 +0100, you wrote:
>On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:24:54 -0600 Ryan Walters wrote:
>> Hi, I've been trying to figure this out for a few days now, and can't
>> seem to get it to work. I want to pin not based on [stable, testing,
>> unstable], but based on distribution release,
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 22:59:57 -0600 Jacob Anawalt wrote:
> ...
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2003/debian-user-200304/msg04011.html
> On Wed, 23 Apr 2003 00:16:11 +0100 Colin Watson wrote:
> > ...
> > I didn't realize you were interested in strange multi-release stuff. I
> > don't trust pi
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:24:54 -0600 Ryan Walters wrote:
> Hi, I've been trying to figure this out for a few days now, and can't
> seem to get it to work. I want to pin not based on [stable, testing,
> unstable], but based on distribution release, in my case, [woody,
> potato].
> ...
> /etc/apt/pre
Ryan Walters wrote:
[snip]
I'm still not sure why my setup doesn't work:
[snip]
I must be something extremely simple that I'm missing, anybody else???
Ryan,
You may think horrible things of me for giving this response instead of
an answer to your question, but I stand behind Collin's o
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 22:23:46 -0400, you wrote:
>> Package: *
>> Pin: release potato
>> Pin-Priority: 800
>>
>> Package: *
>> Pin: release woody
>> Pin-Priority: 200
>>
>
>When I read the man pages for apt_preferences, the format is Pin:
>release a=stable, not pin: release woody. Maybe this will
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 08:52:27AM -0500, John Klassa wrote:
> I tried to follow the directions, with respect to "pinning" a particular
> package. Specifically, I went to the main debian site and poked around
> in the package list, and found that "gnump3d" is available in the
> "testing" tree (or
hi,
consider this as an alternative:
- put deb-src entries for testing in your sources.list
- apt-get update
- apt-get source gnump3d -b
- dpkg -i gnump3d_.deb
i'm not sure how well the dependency-handling works for this,
but i've used it to install selected packages from testing onto
a stable
Am Sam, 2002-09-14 um 20.18 schrieb Ralf G. R. Bergs:
> [Cc to pkg maintainer]
>
>
> Hi folx,
>
> I had a strange problem with one machine I wanted to update in order to
> install the fixed openssl. No matter what I did it wouldn't offer me 0.9.6g-
> 0.woody.1, but only the regular (already in
63 matches
Mail list logo
