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

Bug#692536: 'apt-get install' select the wrong version of package from different source list



# forcemerge to closed duplicated support request
forcmerge 692531 692536
thanks

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:41 AM, He, Qingsheng 2
<Qingsheng2.He@sonymobile.com> wrote:
> Package: apt
> Version: 0.8.16 exp5ubuntu14.2
> Justification: breaks unrelated software
> Severity: critical

Adding to what Julien said in the merged bug:
You should mention which "unrelated software" is broken -
and a random script calling apt-get is by definition not unrelated.
Even more that you don't even mention a bug or what is broken…


> So I have 2 questions:

… leading to: Bugs are not a support channel.

Try user orientated mailinglists like the various debian-user lists or
even better a support channel dealing with Ubuntu (LTS) as it seems to
be that you are using that.


> 1.What is the behavior of apt-get when selecting version of a specific
> package among different source lists?
>
> 2.Is there any way we could set a rule to sepcify a specific source that
> have a higher priority that other sources in the source list?

Pinning to the rescue, I would say: man apt_preferences
Careful reading is advised as it is not an easy topic.

And just to be sure: This is still not a support channel, so if you
don't understand the documentation you might need to ask someone
who does, but not in a bugreport - and especially not in a bugreport
flagged as blocking the release of Debian wheezy!
It might block your work, but that is not a reason to block other people …
(which is why Julien wasn't "happy" with this one here)


Note through that your packages have illegal versions (e.g. they don't
 start with a number) so behavior can be undefined and tools might decide
to just refuse to work (or at least complain very loudly like dpkg).

That said APT and dpkg actually agree that -17XX- orders before -17X1-
and that is what you asked for, so my money is on a (very) broken setup.


Best regards

David Kalnischkies


Reply to: