[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

apt-get upgrade doesn't honor my rebuilded packages



Hi,

This is probably a stupid question, but I did a search on this list with
'apt-get source dpkg -i upgrade' and there was no answer, so here it is.

I've upgraded gcc from 3.3 to 3.4 and, since I always build KDE from
CVS, I needed to recompile some c++ dependent packages like fam.
So, I got fam with 'apt-get source libfam0c102 libfam-dev', builded the
packages and installed it with 'dpkg -i libfam0c102_2.7.0-5_i386.deb
libfam-dev_2.7.0-5_i386.deb'. I did the same for expat (turned out not
c++, but anyways, so I build it but didn't install it).
Now if I do 'apt-get -s upgrade', I get

# apt-get -s upgrade
Pakketlijsten worden ingelezen... Klaar
Boom van vereisten wordt opgebouwd... Klaar
De volgende pakketten zullen opgewaardeerd worden:
  libfam-dev libfam0c102
2 pakketten opgewaardeerd, 0 nieuwe paketten geïnstalleerd, 0 verwijderen en 0 niet opgewaardeerd.
Inst libfam0c102 [2.7.0-5] (2.7.0-5 Debian:testing)
Inst libfam-dev [2.7.0-5] (2.7.0-5 Debian:testing)
Conf libfam0c102 (2.7.0-5 Debian:testing)
Conf libfam-dev (2.7.0-5 Debian:testing)

so it wants to replace it again what I just build. How can I prevent this?
What's puzzling me most is that this seems so a common thing to do, jet
I can't find this issue in the apt-howto document.
I tried the local repository method, adding 'deb file:/usr/src/debian debs'
in sources.list, doing a 'apt-get update'. But now I get:
 
# apt-get -s upgrade
Pakketlijsten worden ingelezen... Klaar
Boom van vereisten wordt opgebouwd... Klaar
De volgende pakketten zullen opgewaardeerd worden:
  libexpat1 libexpat1-dev
2 pakketten opgewaardeerd, 0 nieuwe paketten geïnstalleerd, 0
verwijderen en 0 niet opgewaardeerd.
Inst libexpat1 [1.95.6-8] (1.95.6-8 Debian:testing)
Inst libexpat1-dev [1.95.6-8] (1.95.6-8 Debian:testing)
Conf libexpat1 (1.95.6-8 Debian:testing)
Conf libexpat1-dev (1.95.6-8 Debian:testing)

W/o the -s, it downloads the expat pkgs instead of using the local ones. So
this didn't fix it.

Regards,

Koos Vriezen



Reply to: