On Thu, 2006-12-21 at 11:50 -0800, tom arnall wrote: > On Thursday 21 December 2006 11:36, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 09:20:09PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 11:06:54AM -0800, tom arnall wrote: > > > > On Thursday 21 December 2006 10:45, Andrei Popescu wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 10:00:05AM -0800, tom arnall wrote: > > > > > > kloro@debian:~$ fnd apt_preferences > > > > > > /usr/share/man/es/man5/apt_preferences.5.gz > > > > > > /usr/share/man/fr/man5/apt_preferences.5.gz > > > > > > /usr/share/man/man5/apt_preferences.5.gz > > > > > > /usr/share/man/pt_BR/man5/apt_preferences.5.gz > > > > > > /usr/share/apt-listbugs/debian/apt_preferences.rb > > > > > > > > > > > > i.e., i don't have an apt_preferences. > > > > > > > > > > I don't think you should. man apt_preferences refers to the file > > > > > /etc/apt/preferences which AFAIK is used for pinning. > > > > > > > > what are the consequences if i don't have an apt.conf in /etc/apt? or > > > > don't have a 'APT::Default-Release <version>' in it? > > > > > > AFAIK apt will try to upgrade your packages to the newest version > > > it knows about. That means, if you have 'stable' and 'testing' in your > > > sources than it would upgrade everything to testing (on a dist-upgrade). > > > If you add unstable than it upgrades to unstable. > > > > based on other parts of this thread and my own anecdotal information, > > I think that is correct. > > > > A > > then what really is the role of apt.conf in terms of tracking the desired part > of the repository? You should take a look at my sources.list http://www.gregfolkert.net/files/sources.list Read the top of it. -- greg, greg@gregfolkert.net The technology that is Stronger, better, faster: Linux
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part