Re: apt-cacher as package rollback buffer
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 10:18:51AM -0500, Rob Owens wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:32:10AM -0800, freeman wrote:
> >
> I've used apt-cacher, and it worked well. However, I recommend
> apt-cacher-ng (which I'm using now). I have Ubuntu and Debian machines
> on my LAN, and apt-cacher did not keep the distros separate. There were
> several cases where different packages from Ubuntu and Debian had the
> same name and version number, and this caused problems with apt-cacher.
> apt-cacher-ng solved this problem.
>
I looked at -ng. I don't run multiple distros but it is also supposed to be
light and resource friendly. It shouldn't be any trouble to install after
installing cacher.
> >
> > Is pinning really necessary or can I get by with aptitude and my apt.conf
> > file:
> >
> > APT::Default-Release "testing";
> >
> This effectively pins all not-installed packages from testing at 990
> (according to man apt_preferences). Are you running a mixed system? If
> not, then this shouldn't be necessary, but it won't hurt.
>
> If you are running the testing distro, and all you want to do is control
> the version of a specific package, then you can either pin it (apt
> preferences file) or put it on hold (using aptitude).
>
Yeah, testing with an unstable here and there. I've never noticed a
downgrade to unstable or experimental resulting from default priorities or
apt.conf priorities.
But that won't help with rollbacks or a favorite lenny/backport.
Looked at the debian wiki, man apt_preferences and Boyd's preferences file,
which seems a well worked out example.
Seems the apt.conf file includes
priority 100
to the version that is already installed (if any).
priority 500
to the versions that are not installed and do not belong to the
target release.
priority 990
to the versions that are not installed and belong to the target
release.
Methinks a preferences file is required.
--
Kind Regards,
Freeman
Reply to: