Re: mixing unstable with testing just for nvidia: good practices?
On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 14:44:21 -0400, H.S. wrote:
> Jonathan Kaye wrote:
> <SNIP>
>> particular package was already unstable by an earlier choice). To get the
>> unstable version I do this:
>> #aptitude -t unstable install <name of package>
>> This is called "pinning", I believe.
>> Works for me.
>> Cheers,
>> Jonathan
>
>
> Ah, the pinning. I took your example and tweaked it a bit (after
> consulting http://wiki.debian.org/AptPreferences) and now have this:
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> $> cat /etc/apt/apt.conf
> APT::Authentication::TrustCDROM "true";
> Acquire::::Proxy "false";
> APT::Default-Release "testing";
> $> cat /etc/apt/preferences
> Package: *
> Pin: release o=Debian,a=testing
> Pin-Priority: 900
>
> Package: *
> Pin: release o=Debian,a=unstable
> Pin-Priority: 300
>
> $>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> And I also have unstable sources in my sources.list in otherwise testing
> sources. I have also installed nvidia related stuff from unstable.
[...]
> So, how come I am still getting ntp and ntpdate from unstable? I don't
> think they are related to nvidia. What am I missing here? Is it possible
> that while installing nvidia I also pulled some other packages that were
> in unstable (I didn't have preferences file earlier)?
Both ntp and ntpdate are not in testing right now (a licensing issue
IIRC), so they have to come from unstable. When in doubt, use "apt-cache
policy ...":
apt-cache policy ntp ntpdate
--
Regards, | http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer
Florian |
Reply to: