Re: Stable volatile versions

[Liam O'Toole <liam.p.otoole@gmail.com>]

On 2010-06-24, Jordan Metzmeier <titan8990@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Last night I was attempting to install spamassassin on my Lenny box. I
> had some difficulty doing so because it turned out that the volatile
> version had a lesser version number.
>
> The only ways I found to get the volatile version to install was to pin
> the volatile repo to > 1000. I then found that this is the same case
> with tzdata. Here are examples:
>
> tzdata:
>   Installed: 2010a-0lenny1
>   Candidate: 2009l-0lenny1.1
>   Version table:
>  *** 2010a-0lenny1 0
>         500 http://ftp.grokthis.net lenny/main Packages
>         100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
>      2009l-0lenny1.1 0
>        1001 http://volatile.debian.org lenny/volatile/main Packages
>
> spamassassin:
>   Installed: 3.2.5-2+lenny1.1~volatile1
>   Candidate: 3.2.5-2+lenny1.1~volatile1
>   Version table:
>      3.3.1-1~bpo50+1 0
>           1 http://ftp.backports.org lenny-backports/main Packages
>      3.2.5-2+lenny2 0
>         500 http://ftp.grokthis.net lenny/main Packages
>  *** 3.2.5-2+lenny1.1~volatile1 0
>        1001 http://volatile.debian.org lenny/volatile/main Packages
>         100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
>
>
>
> Why are volatile versions made in a way so that using them is a
> "downgrade"? Is it possible that a Lenny point-release has obsoleted a
> volatile version of a package?
>
> Something just did not seem right about this...
>

Both packages were updated in the last Lenny update[1], at which time
they 'leap-frogged' the versions in volatile. Nothing to worry about.

[1] http://www.debian.org/News/2010/20100130

-- 
Liam O'Toole
Cork, Ireland