"holding" installed amd64 packages
Dear All,
I started to play with freshly installed amd64 and one annoying problem
occurred: how to "hold" packages installed for amd64 architecture when
new versions are available for i386 in other apt sources. Sure I can
just put them on hold but that is not nice cause I wouldn't be able to
update/upgrade them later when somebody packages another version of
already installed package. May be you already decided this problem for
yourselves, then please share.
As for me - I glanced over man apt_preferences which seems to be a
perfect way for me to solve this problem - just assign priority > 1000
to installed amd64 packages. We can select packages now by different
fields of Release file (which seems to be absent in every amd64 apt
source I saw so far) and it would be just perfect if we could do that by
Architecture field. but as it comes from man page apt doesn't support
architecture field in such cases because until now it wasn't necessary.
We might overcome that by using any other field to discriminate our
packages but that wouldn't be a neat solution. Another way seems to be
to specify origin where package comes from but that would be specific
for every user so not nice as well
So what I'm suggesting and asking your advice
1. Should I post to a wish list of maintainers of apt package to
provide possibility to give priorities based on architecture?
2. Shouldn't we decide on some centralized resource for debian amd64
binary packages. I've heard that there was an attempt to do that on
Alioth but it seems that there are some problems with that.
3. Decide on which field in Release it is better to adjust? For instance
we can easily use Archive field as testing-amd64, or use Label as
Debian-amd64.
Ideas?
.-.
=------------------------------ /v\ ----------------------------=
Keep in touch // \\ (yoh@|www.)onerussian.com
Yaroslav Halchenko /( )\ ICQ#: 60653192
Linux User ^^-^^ [175555]
Key http://www.onerussian.com/gpg-yoh.asc
GPG fingerprint 3BB6 E124 0643 A615 6F00 6854 8D11 4563 75C0 24C8
Reply to: