On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 03:35:13PM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> Looks broken to me, as well. Perhaps this is worth a bug report? At the very
Yeah, that's next. I was hoping I was missing something.
> Nothing in /etc/apt/preferences.d? What's the output of (apt-cache policy |
> awk
On 2011-03-30 15:00:45 John Bazik wrote:
>My local archive is oldstable (same as lenny), and I have no target
>release defined.
>
>sources.list:
> deb http://mymirror/debian lenny main contrib non-free
> deb http://mymirror/debian-security lenny/updates main contrib non-free
> deb http://mymi
I thought I had a pretty good grasp of pinning, but I can't understand the
following behavior. What I'm trying to do is, for a particular package,
always install the newest package version from either my local archive
OR lenny-backports.
My local archive is oldstable (same as lenny), and I have n
> 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
On Sat,12.Dec.09, 22:09:59, Rob Owens wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 09:49:22AM +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
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
>> 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
On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 09:49:22AM +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 the higher versi
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?
G
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to deb
> 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
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 03:28:19PM +1100, Gordon Wrigley wrote:
> I wasn't sure what venue was best to ask this in, so if this is the
> wrong place please direct me to the correct place.
>
> I'm using APT pinning to pull packages from both Ubuntu Karmic(stable)
> and Ubuntu Lucid(testing) but I'm
On Sat,12.Dec.09, 15:28:19, Gordon Wrigley wrote:
> I wasn't sure what venue was best to ask this in, so if this is the
> wrong place please direct me to the correct place.
Hmm, I would suggest ubuntu-users or similar mailing list, but there is
indeed a chance that your question is not Ubuntu sp
I wasn't sure what venue was best to ask this in, so if this is the
wrong place please direct me to the correct place.
I'm using APT pinning to pull packages from both Ubuntu Karmic(stable)
and Ubuntu Lucid(testing) but I'm having problems getting APT to
produce the behavior I want.
What I want i
13 matches
Mail list logo
