[Fwd: Re: need advice for correct sources.list because of broken packages]

["A.E.Lawrence" <A.E.Lawrence@lboro.ac.uk>]

--- Begin Message ---

• To: Alexander Nagel <feuerschwanz76@web.de>
• Subject: Re: need advice for correct sources.list because of broken packages
• From: "A.E.Lawrence" <A.E.Lawrence@lboro.ac.uk>
• Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 19:00:28 +0100
• Message-id: <4258183C.4000705@lboro.ac.uk>
• In-reply-to: <[🔎] d38c6u$53i$00$1@news.t-online.com>
• References: <[🔎] d374n2$que$05$1@news.t-online.com> <[🔎] 1113005293.5603.21.camel@localhost> <[🔎] d38c6u$53i$00$1@news.t-online.com>

Alexander Nagel wrote:

Javier Kohen schrieb:

deb http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/debian-pure64 sarge main contrib non-free

is mentioned in the FAQ so it's some kind official
and therefore these packages seems to be broken.
And the other adress:

deb http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64 sarge main contrib non-free

seems to work but wants to install newer packages which are in SID (IMHO).

Can someone clarify this please? The FAQ, the AMD64 and the archive structure document (alioth seems to be down just now, so I haven't got the URIs) all differ just enough to be confusing :-)

I find broken package dependencies in critical cases (libc6-dev is included) when I have used either sarge or sid from debian-pure64. Will these go away if I use pure64? I am on a low bandwidth connection ATM, so I can't test easily.

ael

--- End Message ---