Re: Configuring /etc/apt/preferences

From: Vincent Lefevre (vincent_at_vinc17.org)
Date: 04/23/04

  • Next message: Nate Duehr: "Re: Simple Qmail Setup" 
    Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 03:23:57 +0200
To: Debian User List <debian-user@lists.debian.org>

    On 2004-04-22 23:49:49 +0200, Andrei Badea wrote:
    > Having a slow Internet connection, I want to set /etc/apt/preferences so
    > that packages from the CDs have a greater priority that those on the
    > network. So I put in preferences:
    >
    > Package: *
    > Pin: origin ftp.cz.debian.org
    > Pin-Priority: 500
    >
    > IMHO this should set a priority of 500 for all packages from the ftp
    > mirror.

    If I've understood correctly, this sets a priority of *at least* 500
    for all packages from the ftp mirror. But you may have other rules
    setting a higher priority.

    > However, when I do a "apt-cache policy", I get:
    >
    > ... lines for the cdroms, priority 990 ...
    > 990 ftp://ftp.cz.debian.org unstable/main Packages
    > release o=Debian,a=unstable,l=Debian,c=main
    > origin ftp.cz.debian.org
    > 990 ftp://ftp.cz.debian.org unstable/contrib Packages
    > release o=Debian,a=unstable,l=Debian,c=contrib
    > origin ftp.cz.debian.org
    > Pinned Packages:
    >
    > So the priority of the network packages still is 990. Also, when I try
    > to install a package, APT would always install the newest version from
    > the network.
    >
    > Could please anyone explain why? Thank you for any help.

    This 990 may come from that [from apt_preferences(5)]:

       priority 990
           to the versions that are not installed and belong to the target
           release.

    (whatever the source...).

    The problem with preferences is that one can only increase a priority,
    not decrease it. 

    -- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.org> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% validated (X)HTML - Acorn / RISC OS / ARM, free software, YP17,
Championnat International des Jeux Mathématiques et Logiques, etc.
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
  • Next message: Nate Duehr: "Re: Simple Qmail Setup"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: [PATCH] sched: smpnice work around for active_load_balance()
      ... It is undesirable for HT/MC packages to have more than one of their CPUs ... as it needed some rework with your smpnice patch in place.. ... I can show scheduling scenarios which will fail... ... of different priority tasks... ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: [PATCH] sched: smpnice work around for active_load_balance()
      ... It is undesirable for HT/MC packages to have more than one of their CPUs ... I can show lots of examples where load balancing fails to do the right thing without the smpnice patches so it becomes a matter of which are more important. ... of different priority tasks... ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Pinning to testing
      ... from now on, I'd like to be tracking sarge, but certain packages should ... Pin: release a=unstable ... Pin-Priority: 302 ...
      (Debian-User)
    • Re: Configuring /etc/apt/preferences
      ... >>that packages from the CDs have a greater priority that those on the ... Binary-2 ]/ unstable contrib main main/debian-installer ... >>to install a package, APT would always install the newest version from ...
      (Debian-User)
    • Re: Reboot in output from "last":
      ... > be because at some point there was a bug in there, ... running, new network socket listeners, misbehaviour of normal commands, ... This is another reason to keep /usr for packages provided by the system ... with a proper firewall in place and minimal installation ...
      (comp.os.linux.security)