Re: apt doesn't upgrade packages
On Sun, Jul 25, 2004 at 01:45:55PM +0200, Mikael Magnusson wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 09:34:30PM -0400, Anthony Costa wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 06:10:27PM -0700, Aaron Tomb wrote:
> > > I'm having a very strange problem. As of about a week ago, apt-get stopped
> > > noticing new packages and upgrading them. It still downloads package lists, and
> > > if I tell it a specific package version, as in:
> > >
> > > apt-get install mozilla-firefox=0.9.1-5
> > >
> > > it'll install the newer version. However, if I just say 'apt-get upgrade' (or
> > > dist-upgrade, or dselect-upgrade), it says that there are no new packages. I'm
> > > using apt 0.5.26, dpkg 1.10.23, and dselect 1.10.23. No one else I've talked to
> > > is having this problem, so I think it's an issue of configuration, rather than
> > > a bug in apt. But I've had no luck trying to fix it. I've changed my
> > > sources.list several times, to try different mirrors, to no avail. Does anyone
> > > have any idea what might be wrong?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Aaron
> > >
> > i'm having the exact same problem. i'm currently tracking unstable and
> > testing, w/ unstable src. i've consolidated my sources.list to the
> > bare minimum (testing main contrib + updates), all to no avail. ideas?
> > >
>
> Hi,
> mozilla-firefox-0.9.1-5 hasn't entered testing yet. Run apt-cache policy to
> view versions available in sources.list and installed and candidate version.
>
[...]
Sorry, I missed the original post, so I'm replying to a reply. I had
this problem about a month ago. After thrashing around quite a bit,
including composing a message to d-u which I never sent, I found that
something had messed with the /etc/apt/preferences file. All the
pin-priority numbers were reversed from whta I thought they should be
(I track unstable). After I changed them back to what I thought they
should be, with unstable having the highest number, things returned to
normal. Unfortunately I don't know how the file got changed since it
took me a couple of weeks to figure it out.
This brings me to another point - what should the assigned numbers be?
On my system they had been changed to - stable:1001, testing:101,
unstable:99. I changed this to stable:100, testing:900, unstable:1000
and this seems to work OK. My question is: what should these numbers
be ideally? Or is it perfectly arbitrary? Did I even find the
correct solution? I'm sure this is all in the docs somewhere, but I
haven't found it yet.
--
Martin Hillyer
Reply to: