Re: so, systemd now and teh world still turns...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 06/05/2014 04:05 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>> From: Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>
>
>> Why bother when a simple pin will do the job:
>
> Because installing a package is cleaner than modifying some
> configuration file, and because APT pinning is sometimes fragile and
> can have interactions with other pinning stanzas and is something
> IMHO reserved for the local admin to touch.
In my experience, however, APT pinning is more robust than package
holding, in terms of what apt-get will do when told to dist-upgrade.
In my experience, when using package holding, trying to install or
upgrade something that has a dependency conflict (or versioned
dependency) against something that's held will often - if not always -
result in apt-get failing with a "you have held broken packages"
message.
By contrast, when using APT pinning, the same install or upgrade attempt
against something that's pinned will result in apt-get figuring out a
way to resolve the dependencies automatically, without changing the
version of the pinned package.
IOW, package holding seems to simply kill the automatic
dependency-resolution process, but APT pinning seems to actually
cooperate with it.
Consequently, I'd have been more inclined to call package holding
"fragile" than to do so with APT pinning. What leads you to the opposite
conclusion?
- --
The Wanderer
Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
A government exists to serve its citizens, not to control them.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=NiVT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: