On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:03:50PM -0300, Matias D. Fritz wrote: > * What led up to the situation? > I found an inconsistence between the preferences file description > configuration. > * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or > ineffective)? > if the preferences files is set as: > "Archive: unstable" -> then the preference configuration is not taken > into consideration. No error message. > > if the preferences file is set as: > "Pin: release unstable" || "Pin: release a=unstable" -> then the > preference configuration works as expected. > > * What was the outcome of this action? > Set some priority to unstable Packages be not installed or marked as > pending upgrades. > With the "Archive: unstable" aptitude shows lots of packages pending. > With the "Pin: release a=testing" aptitude shows the packages without > pending action. > > * What outcome did you expect instead? > a consistent behavior.
"Archive: unstable" is just not valid syntax for what you intend to do… only "Pin" is supported for that. APT does not warn about that, yes, but that can be considered a feature of sorts as it means future versions of apt can introduce new fields without older versions exploding. You can like that or not, but that is how apt usually behaves in these situations as we deal a lot with compatibility between versions, so that is how it is. I also don't think it is helpful to introduce another line to express the same thing (especially as its more like introducing ten more lines to replicate the codename/suite/version/… behaviour). Also, this bunch of bugreports is not really related to what you describe in your message. The "issue" in the bugreports is that apt considers packages with same version but different content as different… which is a feature as if the package is intended to have different content it should have a different version (like a local rebuild), which is why this report is tagged wontfix. Best regards David Kalnischkies
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
