>>>>> "AB" == Anders Boström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>> "MZ" == Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MZ> On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 10:17:46AM +0100, Anders Boström wrote: >>> sid:~# apt-cache policy autofs >>> autofs: >>> Installed: 4.1.3-5 >>> Candidate: 4.1.3-5 >>> Version Table: >>> 4.1.3-6 0 >>> 50 http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org testing/main Packages >>> 50 http://bach.hpc2n.umu.se unstable/main Packages >>> 50 http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org unstable/main Packages >>> *** 4.1.3-5 0 >>> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status >>> [...] >>> Why isn't autofs upgraded??? MZ> Because you told apt not to upgrade it. >>> -- /etc/apt/preferences -- >>> >>> Package: * >>> Pin: release a=unstable >>> Pin-Priority: 50 MZ> 50 < 100 AB> Yes, that's unstable, but the testing version is also 4.1.3-6. Why has AB> that version also prio 50? If I perform the same command on i386, AB> apt-cache policy autofs, is the testing version given a prio of AB> 500. What is different? I just found out that the error is in the Release-file(s) from http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/pure64/dists/testing . They specify "Suite: unstable". A new amd64-archive has recently (within the last week or so) been setup under debian-pure64. That archive has a working testing. However the amd64 FAQ's, TXT-files etc. are not exactly helping in identifying what archive to use... / Anders
