On Monday 15 February 2010 12:22:08 Freeman wrote: > 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: > > > 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? > > 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. Keep in mind that stable/backports mixed with testing/unstable/experimental isn't well-tested by the DDs. It should work, but if it breaks, upgrading packages from stable/backports to unreleased versions might be the first step in getting help, and doing that might be disruptive to your environment. > Methinks a preferences file is required. Mixed systems that are supported with no configuration change: stable/backports unstable/experimental Mixed systems that need Default-Release set properly: stable/testing testing/unstable testing/unstable/experimental Any other mixing will need a preferences file. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.