Re: Problems running a mixed stable/testing system
On Friday 11 October 2002 08:39 pm, Jerome Acks Jr wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 05:05:56PM -0600, Shawn Willden wrote:
> > Apt::Default-Release "woody";
>
> I don't find this as a valid configuration directive in
> /usr/share/doc/apt/examples/configure-index.gz.
I'ts mentioned in the apt-get man page and in the APT HOWTO (section 3.7).
> A number of these have had security upgrades.
Security upgrades in Woody? My Woody is completely up to date, including
security updates. Doh! I just found the problem. My security update line
in sources.list somehow got pointed at Sarge.
After fixing that, now it only wants to upgrade autoconf1.6, which I just
removed instead.
> The courier packages are
> probably held back because they depend on newer versions of openssl
> and libssl0.9.6.
Actually, they were held back because it didn't want to upgrade courier-base,
which it didn't want to upgrade for some reason (although there were no
conflicts holding it back). If I explicitly told it to upgrade courier-base,
then it unheld the others. I suspect it was the pinning that was holding
back courier-base. The others were to be updated because they were in
sarge/updates, but held back because they required the sarge version of
courier-base.
> If you have woody, sarge, and sid in your sources.list and are using
> aptitude, highlight the name of the upgradeable package, press enter,
> and scroll to bottom of displayed information to see which of the
> available version the upgrade will install.
I know how to do that. Is there any way to get it to show me which version is
from which archive?
> Since automake1.6 is in testing, do you still have testing and sid
> lines in your sources.list? If you still do and want to keep them, you
> could make your /etc/apt/preferences something like:
>
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=testing
> Pin-Priority: 90
>
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=unstable
> Pin-Priority: 60
>
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=stable
> Pin-Priority: 990
I'll have to experiment with that. It doesn't seem to do quite what I would
expect. Thanks!
Shawn.
Reply to: