Re: Some myths regarding apt pinning
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 04:27:09PM +0100, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote:
> Those not wanting to pull libc/unstable etc. should probably just
> recompile from source, which becomes ever easier with apt-src and
> apt-build.
Actually, this is often a nightmare. After following a huge long trail
of versioned build-deps (all of which also need to be built), you'll likely
come across one which requires a new unstable version of debhelper, which
in turn will require po-debconf and a whole bunch of other stuff which
you won't be able to build for stable (a new python is often in there, which
will require new tk, tcl, tix...).
[/me puts head in clouds...]
I wonder how easy it would be to keep a collection of, say, all the
essential packages from unstable built on stable.
It might require that all essential packages only depend on packages
available in stable, I guess...
Essential packages might not be the best selection though; just the ones that
always seem to crop up in this kind of situation - debhelper, any significant
new versions of perl, python...
[/me comes back to earth with a bump]
Cheers,
Nick
--
Nick Phillips -- nwp@lemon-computing.com
Be security conscious -- National defense is at stake.
Reply to: