Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
Oi Henrique,
2006-01-07 00:22 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh:
Package: aptitude
Version: 0.4.1-1
Severity: important
I am tagging this as important because any bug that makes people install
experimental packages unawares is quite problematic :)
$ apt-cache policy libarts1c2a
libarts1c2a:
Installed: 1.4.3-3
Candidate: 1.5.0-3
Version table:
1.5.0-3 0
990 http://mirrors.kernel.org unstable/main Packages
990 http://ftp.fi.debian.org unstable/main Packages
1.5.0-2 0
-10 http://mirrors.kernel.org experimental/main Packages
-10 http://ftp.fi.debian.org experimental/main Packages
*** 1.4.3-3 0
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
However, aptitude does this:
libarts1c2a recommends libarts1-akode
--\ The following actions will resolve this dependency:
-> Upgrade libarts1c2a [1.4.3-3 (now) -> 1.5.0-2 (experimental, experimental)]
-> Keep libarts1c2a at version 1.4.3-3 (now)
-> Remove libarts1c2a [1.4.3-3 (now)]
-> Install libarts1-akode [4:3.5.0-2 (experimental, experimental)]
-> Leave the dependency "libarts1c2a recommends libarts1-akode" unresolved.
i.e it prefers to install the experimental version, even if it is priority
-10. The correct solution is to install libarts1c2a 1.5.0-3, and leave the
dependency unresolved. OR to hold everything. But installing anything that
has a negative priority is a no-no.
For reference, my /etc/apt/preferences is:
Package: *
Pin: release a=experimental
Pin-Priority: -10
This should not happen with "recent" versions of aptitude, recent as in
the last 6 years at least, because solutions involving installations /
upgrades of non-default versions are kept in a different level and only
offered last, if at all, below upgrading to default versions, removing
it or keeping everything at the same version.
Have you experience this behaviour recently?
Cheers.
--
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________
Aptitude-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel
