Re: Local apt repository and specific version
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 07/01/2010 03:51 PM, Didster wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> We use a local apt repository as a means to distribute our own
> software. The software is not and will not ever be part of the
> official Debian archives. Our software consists of 4 packages, 3 real
> ones, lets call then package1, package2 and package3 and a overall
> package that exists to bring in the three packages at a specific
> version to make a overall version of our system - gets call that
> package-system.
>
> The local repository consists of many versions of each of the four
> packages. When asking apt to install the very latest version of
> package-system, everything works just as it should. But when asking
> apt to install a specific older version of package-system (which we
> sometimes need to do), apt complains and says the dependencies cannot
> be met.
>
> Assume we have
>
What about a system similar to say, debian kernels. You can add the
versions to the package names so they become distinct packages eg.
package1-2.1.88. Of course, this could end up being a nightmare in the
Conflicts: field to prevent multiple version from being installed.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)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=DfPE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: