Re: holding a package against upgrades
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 05/14/2014 11:31 AM, United States Ret. wrote:
> I have been using sid and do not want iceweasel 29.
>
> I have decided to revert to iceweasel 24.5 and have now put that on
> hold (=) in dselect and worry that will override my decision and
> upgrade anyway.
>
> Is there a better way to make sure apt never upgrades from iceweasel
> 24.5 like pin or priority or something.
A package version pin is probably the way to go on this.
Here's what I have in /etc/apt/preferences:
========
Package: iceweasel
Pin: version 24.*
Pin-Priority: 1001
========
I used something similar with 17.* until I was ready to upgrade (having
tested first in a VM to make sure I knew how to fix anything that would
break), and I expect to do it again with 31.* when the time comes.
I used to use holds ("echo 'NAME hold' | dpkg --set-selections"), but
that led to held-packages dependency breakage when dist-upgrading
sometimes. I find that package version pinning works much better.
- --
The Wanderer
Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
A government exists to serve its citizens, not to control them.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=gZ1F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: