[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#420794: apt-cache show --no-all-versions does not produce expected output



Package: apt
Version: 0.6.46.4-0.1

Hi,
I have configured my apt sources.list to use "stable", "testing" 
and "unstable". I use pinning and APT::Default-Release to stay at "stable".
My current config is attached.


Invoking

`apt-cache show libc6 --no-all-versions'

gives me the package from unstable. Which is libc6   2.5-4   unstable
I expected the one from stable libc6   2.3.6.ds1-13    stable


-- snip from apt-cache manual page --
-a, --all-versions 
Print full records for all available versions. This is the default; to turn it 
off, use __ --no-all-versions __. If --no-all-versions is specified, only the 
__candidate version__ will displayed (the one which would be selected for 
installation). This option is only applicable to the show command. 
Configuration Item: APT::Cache::AllVersions.
-- snap --


reading in the manual page of apt-cache,
apt-cache show performs a function similar to dpkg --print-avail

Invoking

`dpkg --print-avail libc6'

show the expected libc6, but does not show the "Filename:" entry
but nevermind I can work around that in my scripts,
although using `apt-cache show' would make my scripts smarter :-)


I am using Debian GNU/Linux 4.0, kernel 2.6.18-4-k7 and libc6 2.3.6.ds1-13.

/etc/apt/apt.conf:
APT::Default-Release "stable";

/etc/apt/preferences:
Package: *
Pin: release o=Debian,a=stable
Pin-Priority: 900

Package: *
Pin: release o=Debian,a=testing
Pin-Priority: 400

Package: *
Pin: release o=Debian,a=unstable
Pin-Priority: 300

Package: *
Pin: release o=Debian
Pin-Priority: -1

/etc/apt/sources.list:
#
# stable
#
deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free

#
# testing
#
deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian testing main contrib non-free

#
# unstable
#
deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free

#
# stable updates
#
deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free




Reply to: