Re: APT problem
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 09:31:57PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> [Alex Romosan wrote:]
> > which are not on by default and then i have to put the packages on
> > hold because apt wants to get the remote ones.
> You have to do this anyhow, otherwise the package will get upgraded
> and you will loose your changes. In all cases I can think of where
> a package is locally recompiled and has not been placed on hold you
> would indeed want the 'newer' archive package to be installed. The
> motivating factor here is local slink recompiles of potato packages.
i may be missing something here, but why not change the debian revision
number when you recompile the package? takes a few seconds to edit the
changelog. that's what i do...it works for me<tm>.
e.g. if the package is version 1.0-1, change it to something like
then it will only be upgraded by apt or dselect if -2 comes out. you'll
still need to hold the package if you don't want that to happen (that's
a feature, not a bug :)
if you think that running dselect just to put a package on hold is a
PITA, use my little dpkg-hold script:
# dpkg-hold -- command line tool to flag package(s) as held.
# by Craig Sanders, 1998-10-26. This script is hereby placed into the
# public domain.
# BUGS: this script has absolutely no error checking. this is not good.
if [ -z "$*" ] ; then
echo " dpkg-hold <package...>"
for i in $@ ; do
echo "$i hold"
done | dpkg --set-selections
FWIW, i think this script should probably be included with dpkg, or
similar command line functionality be added to dpkg. cc-ed to Wichert
for his wishlist.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org