Re: Two suggestions for woody release
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Two suggestions for woody release
- From: Joey Hess <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 23:11:02 -0500
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20020201041102.GB1467@kitenet.net>
- Mail-followup-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <20020130164401.GF3808@netexpress.net>
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20020129143240.GA15990@azure.humbug.org.au> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20020130062348.GA14973@azure.humbug.org.au> <20020130164401.GF3808@netexpress.net>
Steve Langasek wrote:
> Yes, of course there's apt pin support, but the people we're most
> concerned about not accidentally running unstable are the ones least
> capable of figuring out pin support on their own. So for Thomas's idea
> to work, there needs to be either an easy interface to allow users to
> configure this functionality, or a failsafe pin config that does what's
> needed. I agree though that as far as raw apt functionality is
> concerned, we seem to already be where we need to be.
Coming in a bit late here, but this parallels something I was thinking
about today. base-config's apt-setup could easily add any set of
distributuons to sources.list and set up an apt.conf file to pin to the
release the user picks. The issues are:
* Doesn't work for CD only installs.
* Increases download time of apt-get update. Will this annoy users?
Would I have to ask if they want this done?
* base-config is supposed to be frozen already.
see shy jo