Bug#174200: marked as done (apt: negative priorities in /etc/apt/preferences do not work as expected)
Your message dated 06 Jul 2003 17:17:06 +0200
with message-id <1057504625.2687.1123.camel@thanatos>
and subject line Not a bug
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 24 Dec 2002 14:56:33 +0000
>From barbier@liberte.polytechnique.fr Tue Dec 24 08:56:32 2002
Return-path: <barbier@liberte.polytechnique.fr>
Received: from smtp-101.noc.nerim.net (mallaury.noc.nerim.net) [62.4.17.101]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 18QqTv-0005Ro-00; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:56:31 -0600
Received: from localhost.localdomain (sinibar.net1.nerim.net [62.4.18.43])
by mallaury.noc.nerim.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 47CE062D05; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:56:29 +0100 (CET)
Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id EE02624A5B; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:55:58 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:55:58 +0100
From: Denis Barbier <barbier@debian.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: apt: negative priorities in /etc/apt/preferences do not work as expected
Message-ID: <20021224145558.GA641@imacs.polytechnique.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-Reportbug-Version: 2.9
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.6 required=5.0
tests=SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_MUTT
version=2.41
X-Spam-Level:
Package: apt
Version: 0.5.4
Severity: normal
Hello,
I do not want to install libc6-2.3.1-6, so I tried to put in
/etc/apt/preferences:
Package: libc6
Pin: version 2.3.1-6
Pin-Priority: -100
It does not work as expected because higher priorities are provided
by other sources. My guessing is that a top-level stratum is missing,
priority above 10000 could mean that packages are not installed.
Denis
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux france0danemark2 2.4.20-386 #1 Sat Dec 21 14:31:26 EST 2002 i586
Locale: LANG=fr_FR@euro, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR@euro (ignored: LC_ALL set)
Versions of packages apt depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.1-5 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 1:2.95.4-15 The GNU stdc++ library
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 174200-done) by bugs.debian.org; 6 Jul 2003 15:17:10 +0000
>From jdthood@yahoo.co.uk Sun Jul 06 10:17:07 2003
Return-path: <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk>
Received: from mars.mj.nl [81.91.1.49]
by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 19ZBGF-0003dy-00; Sun, 06 Jul 2003 10:17:07 -0500
Received: (qmail 25549 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2003 15:17:06 -0000
Received: from 81-91-5-95-customer.mjdsl.nl (HELO thanatos.localdomain) (81.91.5.95)
by www.mj.nl with SMTP; 6 Jul 2003 15:17:06 -0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by thanatos.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F39310D62E
for <174200-done@bugs.debian.org>; Sun, 6 Jul 2003 17:17:06 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: Not a bug
From: Thomas Hood <jdthood@yahoo.co.uk>
To: 174200-done@bugs.debian.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <1057504625.2687.1123.camel@thanatos>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.0
Date: 06 Jul 2003 17:17:06 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Delivered-To: 174200-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=4.0
tests=BAYES_20,USER_AGENT_XIMIAN
version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_06_27
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_06_27 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)
#174200 was not a bug, but a misunderstanding on the part
of the user.
Reply to: