On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 22:59:09 -0700, Steve Juranich wrote:
> I'm starting to come to the conclusion that the new way that AJ is running
> the sarge release cycle is leaving far more truly "unstable" packages in
> the "unstable" tree,
I see little difference with the previous development cycle.
On Wed, 2002-09-18 at 08:24, Leo Spalteholz wrote:
> Steve Juranich wrote:
[downgrading]
> I'm not an expert for sure but I just came across this the other
> day while reading up about apt pinning. I think what you need to
> do is pin sarge with a priority greater than 1000. Something
> alon
Steve Juranich wrote:
> I'm starting to come to the conclusion that the new way that AJ is running the
> sarge release cycle is leaving far more truly "unstable" packages in the
> "unstable" tree, so that it probably makes more sense for me to be pulling
> packages from testing rather than unst
I'm starting to come to the conclusion that the new way that AJ is running the
sarge release cycle is leaving far more truly "unstable" packages in the
"unstable" tree, so that it probably makes more sense for me to be pulling
packages from testing rather than unstable.
So is the best way to m
4 matches
Mail list logo
