On Sat, Apr 22, 2000 at 02:02:35AM -0400, Marshal Kar-Cheung Wong wrote: > >>>>> "Ethan" == Ethan Benson <erbenson@alaska.net> writes: > > >> and if you want to compile them there's always 'apt-get > >> --compile source packagename'. if you haven't used it before > >> here's how it works :) > > > with the annoying side affect of apt insisting on replacing the > > locally compiled packages with the debian binary version... > > unless you never use apt-get upgrade again or put everything on > > hold, which hides the fact that there is a newer version... > > (why does apt do that?) > > What might be cool is if you compiled your own, it would change the > version number so that there would be not conflict between official > binaries and roll-your-own. Kinda like using the --revision flag with > make-kpkg. --revision just sets an epoch, which is rather evil since it will think your package is newwer then ANY upgraded package unless the upgraded package has an epoch > yours. > I guess ultimately, what would be best, would be to keep track of the > sources that you have installed, so that you know when the sources > have been updated. Or have apt recompile for you. well i just don't understand why apt thinks it should `upgrade' my package whose version number is == to the one its `upgrading' to. > Heck, why not just have the computer read our minds. :) thats what MacOS and Windoze tries to do ;-) -- Ethan Benson http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
Attachment:
pgpC4aebUbZGg.pgp
Description: PGP signature