Re: apt-pining: no priority (or zero) specified for pining
Le Ven 22 février 2013 2:58, Tom H a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Rob Owens <rowens@ptd.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 09:02:12PM +0100, berenger.morel@neutralite.org
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Well, the error message in title is not the exact one, but a
>>> translation of the one I have (which is exactly "W : Aucune priorité
>>> (ou zéro) n'a été spécifiée pour l'épinglage" but it is in french
>>> so...).
>>>
>>> The consequence is that it seems my preferences is not used, testing
>>> packages have lower priority that unstable, which is not what I want.
>>>
>>> My sources.list include a line for "wheezy main non-free", another
>>> for "unstable main" and the last for "experimental main" (my need was
>>> to add g++4.8, in the hope it include
>>> "std::set::emplace_hint(iterator, ...)").
>>> Here is the sources.list:
>>> =======================
>>> deb http://ftp2.fr.debian.org/debian wheezy main non-free deb
>>> http://ftp2.fr.debian.org/debian unstable main
>>> deb http://ftp2.fr.debian.org/debian experimental main
>>> =======================
>>>
>>>
>>> My preferences file contain this:
>>> =======================
>>> Package: *
>>> Pin: release a=wheezy
>>> Pin-Priority: 900
>>>
>>>
>>> Package: *
>>> Pin: release a=unstable
>>> Pin-Priority:200
>>> =======================
>>>
>>
>> You are missing a space before '200'. I'm not sure if that's the
>> problem or not, but you should fix it and try it out.
>
> It should also be "n=wheezy" or "a=testing" and not "a=wheezy".
Arg! PEBCAK!
I apologize...
It was due to a typo in my file ("Pin-Prioriy"), which was not reported in
my mail because since it was on a different computer, I rewrite the lines,
and instinctively corrected it.
So, the text saying that there was no priority set was referring the fact
that the line Pin-PrioriTy was not found.
Fixing or not the errors you pointed did nothing, but I'll keep them fixed
for beauty.
Again, I apologize to have make you loose your time with wrong
informations and stupid mistake from me.
Reply to: