Bug#40006: apt needs to be more configurable
Package: apt
Version: 0.3.7
Severity: wishlist
I moved to Debian from RedHat in January and I love the system: it's so
well-organized and easy to use compared to RedHat's impenetrable jumble
of an FTP site.
Apt-get is very simple and straightforward.
However, after a few months of use I've grown frustrated by the lack of
configurability in apt-get. It's _too_ simple.
I'm dialing from a 56k modem that rarely (due to phone line problems)
gets above 26.4k. Bandwidth is important to me. On the other hand, I
like to be "close to the edge" on various packages, both from necessity
(I need XFree 3.3.3.1 for my Viper 550 AGP card) and interest.
On the other hand, I _don't_ care to be on the cutting edge for other
packages. For example, I don't need the latest unstable version of
anything in the "games" category: I rarely use them except to show off
to others. I don't want the latest TeX or Emacs minor update, because
it's too big and the updates are generally not worth it for me.
So, I wish I could specify some kind of customization file to apt-get
that would let me exert finer-grain control over how things are
updated. I'd like to say things like:
* Regardless of the subsequent rules, pull in any package updates
labeled as security fixes.
* Leave everything in the games category as the latest stable version.
* Leave everything in the tex category as the latest stable or frozen
versions.
* Leave any package matching "emacs*" as the latest stable version
unless the update has an "urgency" of >low
Etc. etc. You get the idea.
Obviously such a file is optional and without it, apt-get would behave
as it does now...
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <psmith@baynetworks.com> Network Management Development
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.
Reply to: