Re: Some myths regarding apt pinning
Erik Steffl <email@example.com> writes:
> [ ... ]
> but the point is that pinning is not very good because you either
> bring a number of important packages from unstable (libc6, perl etc)
> or you simply cannot use it. reading of the manual page and checking
> the apt-listchanges does not solve the problem. i.e. you recommend
> pinning, person reads the manpage, tries pinning and finds out that
> it was pretty much pointless excercise because it would upgrade large
> part of the system to unstable. or yet another wording: Adrian Bunk
> wasn't complaining about system actually upgrading packages but about
> system trying to upgrade packages.
I want to be sure that I understand the significance of this. Are you
saying that pinning a certain package, say "randompackage", to
"unstable" in /etc/apt/preferences is worse than doing this the first
time that "randompackage" is installed? ...
apt-get -t unstable install randompackage
Or do these two methods have equally undesirable effects?