Re: apt-cacher as package rollback buffer
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:59:33PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> 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.
Thanks Boyd. That is an interesting implementation chart.
My system = Section 2, Item 3, if I stay away from stable/backports.
Except for package rollbacks! Could a rollback to a version no longer
included in any release represent a deviation from
testing/unstable/experimental ?
Also, just thought of the presence of a few proprietary debs and debs I've
built. They existing ones haven't effected anything to date.
However, could a rollback represent an incursion on the priority system?
--
Kind Regards,
Freeman
Reply to: