Re: Re: Re: apt pinning question

2009-12-14 Thread Gordon Wrigley
> I wonder if it'll behave any differently if you use aptitude instead of > apt-get. I've never used aptitude before, so after your suggestion I gave it a try and aptitude does behave differently. What it does is it complains of the same problem as apt, then it offers to fix it and in every examp

Re: Re: apt pinning question

2009-12-13 Thread Rob Owens
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 03:57:27PM +1100, Gordon Wrigley wrote: > >> Another way to look at this would be to ask... > >> > >> Given two available versions of a package where the higher version has > >> the lower priority, how do I get apt to automatically install the > >> lower priority one when th

Re: Re: apt pinning question

2009-12-12 Thread Gordon Wrigley
>> Another way to look at this would be to ask... >> >> Given two available versions of a package where the higher version has >> the lower priority, how do I get apt to automatically install the >> lower priority one when the higher version is required to meet a >> dependency? > > If the higher ve

Re: Re: apt pinning question

2009-12-12 Thread Gordon Wrigley
> Are you sure that this applies to *all* lucid sections, including > lucid-updates and lucid-security? I recall reading some blogs that > indicated that Ubuntu's pinning and default release settings don't > work exactly like Debian's. I checked it with apt-cache policy and everything karmic is 5