Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 13:21:27 +0200, go...@dobosevic.com in gmane.linux.debian.user wrote: So, I think the best solution is to ask developers to upload swfdec-mozilla to debian-volatile and to support it there too. What do you guys think? I'm think you are right. This days most of end user's can't live without this things (messenger, flash etc.)and they very often change. Web browsers to. ;-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
Aniruddha mailingdotl...@gmail.com writes: I would like to install the latest version swfdec-mozilla (because it offers autoplay). I intent to track stable as closely as possible. As far I can tell there are four possibilities to achieve this: 1) Temporary enable testing/unstable repositories and install the program 2) Download *.deb from packages.debian org 3) Use apt-pinning 4) Compile from source, this requires option 1 to be enabled. Otherwise you get the following error: # apt-get build-dep swfdec-mozilla E: Build-Depends dependency for swfdec-mozilla cannot be satisfied because the package libswfdec-0.8-dev cannot be found I am interested to learn the best method to install a newer package while remaining as close (compatible) with stable as possible. Thanks in advance! How about asking the developer(s) to upload swfdec-mozilla to debian-volatile? Flash stuff changes pretty often and hence the plugin becomes useless at some point during the life of the stable. Like the last time they changed something on youtube and swfdec couldn't play it anymore, until the new version came out (which by the way wasn't uploaded to stable). I think updates that break package functionality is something that qualifies for inclusion in debian-volatile. At least that is how I understand why, for instance, pidgin is in debian-volatile. I fail to see the difference between pidgin and swfdec-mozilla in this case. So, I think the best solution is to ask developers to upload swfdec-mozilla to debian-volatile and to support it there too. What do you guys think? -- Most writers regard the truth as their most valuable possession, and therefore are most economical in its use. - Mark Twain (1835-1910) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
So, I think the best solution is to ask developers to upload swfdec-mozilla to debian-volatile and to support it there too. What do you guys think? I'm think you are right. This days most of end user's can't live without this things (messenger, flash etc.)and they very often change. -- Bye, Goran Dobosevic Hrvatski: www.dobosevic.com English: www.dobosevic.com/en/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 09:50:27AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: On Mon,18.May.09, 16:28:55, Barclay, Daniel wrote: Michael M. Moore wrote: ... mcu...@drifter:~$ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf APT::Default-Release stable; APT::Cache-Limit 33554432; At some time in the past, APT::Default-Release worked only with the status-based release names (stable, testing, etc.) but didn't work (and didn't report any error message) when given release code names (e.g., lenny, sid, etc.) Has that been fixed yet? Short answer: No. Long answer: see #97564, #254716, #423234 and #509471. If not, how can one avoid having aptitude try to upgrade you to a newly release version (before you more directly choose to)? I'd be interested in a solution as well. Are you talking aptitude bug: 514930 It has interesting comment This bug of aptitude ignoring priority of packages appears to be the same as bug #473296 . It is fixed in experimental only... Osamu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
On Sat,23.May.09, 19:59:31, Osamu Aoki wrote: Has that been fixed yet? Short answer: No. Long answer: see #97564, #254716, #423234 and #509471. If not, how can one avoid having aptitude try to upgrade you to a newly release version (before you more directly choose to)? I'd be interested in a solution as well. Are you talking aptitude bug: 514930 It has interesting comment This bug of aptitude ignoring priority of packages appears to be the same as bug #473296 . It is fixed in experimental only... Yes, it seems Daniel Burrows fixed it for aptitude. I intend to upgrade my brother's main machine to squeeze, but I will need to enable unstable, at least for the kernel, and I want to have a configuration that won't bring any surprises when squeeze is released. Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
On Mon,18.May.09, 16:28:55, Barclay, Daniel wrote: Michael M. Moore wrote: ... mcu...@drifter:~$ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf APT::Default-Release stable; APT::Cache-Limit 33554432; At some time in the past, APT::Default-Release worked only with the status-based release names (stable, testing, etc.) but didn't work (and didn't report any error message) when given release code names (e.g., lenny, sid, etc.) Has that been fixed yet? Short answer: No. Long answer: see #97564, #254716, #423234 and #509471. If not, how can one avoid having aptitude try to upgrade you to a newly release version (before you more directly choose to)? I'd be interested in a solution as well. Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:23 AM, martin f krafft madd...@debian.org wrote: Do you happen to know where I can' find more info about this process? There'll be a large chapter on this in my forthcoming book. Until then, I suggest you check out the stuff I wrote about pbuilder in the current book, or investigate pbuilder, or -- if you are not afraid of a more complex and more powerful approach, investigate schroot+sbuild in combination with LVM snapshots. I don't have a document handy, sorry. -- .''`. martin f. krafft madd...@d.o Looking forward to the release of your book :) What about rebuilding packages with apt-get source / dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -b? Is this also possible (instead of building a Debian package from scratch)? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
also sprach Aniruddha mailingdotl...@gmail.com [2009.05.20.0852 +0200]: Looking forward to the release of your book :) What about rebuilding packages with apt-get source / dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -b? Is this also possible (instead of building a Debian package from scratch)? If you do that on a stable system, then in most cases, the package should install fine on the stable system. -- .''`. martin f. krafft madd...@d.o Related projects: : :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduckhttp://vcs-pkg.org `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems a common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof was to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -- douglas adams, mostly harmless -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
On Sun,17.May.09, 14:06:47, Michael M. Moore wrote: I use a pretty conservative pinning, more conservative than what is given on the wiki. Mine is taken from Martin Krafft's book The Debian System, recently recommended on this list: mcu...@drifter:~$ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf APT::Default-Release stable; APT::Cache-Limit 33554432; mcu...@drifter:~$ cat /etc/apt/preferences Package: * Pin: release a=stable Pin-Priority: 900 The Default-Release option in apt.conf will set stable's priority to 990, why are you changing it again to 900? Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
also sprach Andrei Popescu andreimpope...@gmail.com [2009.05.18.0847 +0200]: The Default-Release option in apt.conf will set stable's priority to 990, why are you changing it again to 900? Two stitches are better than one? ;) In general, I'd say to prefer /etc/apt/preferences over apt.conf, unless you really just need to pin stable as in the above. If you do want more flexibility, then use apt_preferences and comment the apt.conf entry alongside a little note for later reference. By the way, even though one can mix testing and unstable, I suggest to avoid that. http://backports.org contains packages backported from testing and compiled for the stable distribution, which integrate better with the system and are well supported (though unofficial). It's also rather easy to create backports yourself, using a chroot build environment. However, then you'll have to worry about security updates yourself. -- .''`. martin f. krafft madd...@d.o Related projects: : :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduckhttp://vcs-pkg.org `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems if they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers. -- thomas pynchon digital_signature_gpg.asc Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 8:57 AM, martin f krafft madd...@debian.org wrote: By the way, even though one can mix testing and unstable, I suggest to avoid that. http://backports.org contains packages backported from testing and compiled for the stable distribution, which integrate better with the system and are well supported (though unofficial). It's also rather easy to create backports yourself, using a chroot build environment. However, then you'll have to worry about security updates yourself. -- .''`. martin f. krafft madd...@d.o Related projects: Thanks for the answer. And what about downloading an occasional package from packages.debian.org? (like the latest swfdec) is this more preferable then apt-pinning? With building your own backport you mean using apt-get source in a testing/unstable chroot to build a stable package? Do you happen to know where I can' find more info about this process? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
also sprach Aniruddha mailingdotl...@gmail.com [2009.05.18.0954 +0200]: Thanks for the answer. And what about downloading an occasional package from packages.debian.org? (like the latest swfdec) is this more preferable then apt-pinning? This is more or less identical to pinning, except you are simply doing it manually, except telling APT. It's worse than APT in that it doesn't track updates in testing for you. With building your own backport you mean using apt-get source in a testing/unstable chroot to build a stable package? In a stable chroot! Do you happen to know where I can' find more info about this process? There'll be a large chapter on this in my forthcoming book. Until then, I suggest you check out the stuff I wrote about pbuilder in the current book, or investigate pbuilder, or -- if you are not afraid of a more complex and more powerful approach, investigate schroot+sbuild in combination with LVM snapshots. I don't have a document handy, sorry. -- .''`. martin f. krafft madd...@d.o Related projects: : :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduckhttp://vcs-pkg.org `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems it is impossible to foresee the consequences of being clever. -- cristopher strachey digital_signature_gpg.asc Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
Michael M. Moore wrote: ... mcu...@drifter:~$ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf APT::Default-Release stable; APT::Cache-Limit 33554432; At some time in the past, APT::Default-Release worked only with the status-based release names (stable, testing, etc.) but didn't work (and didn't report any error message) when given release code names (e.g., lenny, sid, etc.) Has that been fixed yet? If not, how can one avoid having aptitude try to upgrade you to a newly release version (before you more directly choose to)? Thanks, Daniel -- (Plain text sometimes corrupted to HTML courtesy of Microsoft Exchange.) [F]
What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
I would like to install the latest version swfdec-mozilla (because it offers autoplay). I intent to track stable as closely as possible. As far I can tell there are four possibilities to achieve this: 1) Temporary enable testing/unstable repositories and install the program 2) Download *.deb from packages.debian org 3) Use apt-pinning 4) Compile from source, this requires option 1 to be enabled. Otherwise you get the following error: # apt-get build-dep swfdec-mozilla E: Build-Depends dependency for swfdec-mozilla cannot be satisfied because the package libswfdec-0.8-dev cannot be found I am interested to learn the best method to install a newer package while remaining as close (compatible) with stable as possible. Thanks in advance! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/17/09 09:40, Aniruddha wrote:
I would like to install the latest version swfdec-mozilla (because it
offers autoplay). I intent to track stable as closely as possible. As
far I can tell there are four possibilities to achieve this:
1) Temporary enable testing/unstable repositories and install the program
2) Download *.deb from packages.debian org
3) Use apt-pinning
4) Compile from source, this requires option 1 to be enabled.
Otherwise you get the following error:
# apt-get build-dep swfdec-mozilla
E: Build-Depends dependency for swfdec-mozilla cannot be satisfied
because the package libswfdec-0.8-dev cannot be found
I am interested to learn the best method to install a newer package
while remaining as close (compatible) with stable as possible. Thanks
in advance!
You could use backports.org. It doesn't look as though they have
swfdec-mozilla, but if you want to install any other packages from
testing/unstable you can either download the deb's from
http://www.backports.org/ or add
'deb http://www.backports.org/debian lenny-backports main contrib non-free'
to your sources.list. You'll then need to update ('aptitude update') as
usual, and specify to install from backports for the package you want.
e.g, 'aptitude -t lenny-backports install package-you-want' Hope that
was of some help.
- --
Many thanks
Harry Rickards
- -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.1
GAT/GCM/GCS/GCC/GIT/GM d? s: a? C UL P- L+++ E--- W+++ N o K+
w--- O- M- V- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t 5 X R tv-- b+++ DI D G e* h! !r y?
- --END GEEK CODE BLOCK--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkoP6ogACgkQ1kZz3mRu0GrcfgCdG4uze1djmSbDOv/E0jhzI2S8
6pcAn3sjNXFLehpKuKetf2YAhViLUEZA
=3i5Q
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
Harry Rickards wrote:
On 05/17/09 09:40, Aniruddha wrote:
I would like to install the latest version swfdec-mozilla (because it
offers autoplay). I intent to track stable as closely as possible. As
far I can tell there are four possibilities to achieve this:
1) Temporary enable testing/unstable repositories and install the program
2) Download *.deb from packages.debian org
3) Use apt-pinning
4) Compile from source, this requires option 1 to be enabled.
I am interested to learn the best method to install a newer package
while remaining as close (compatible) with stable as possible. Thanks
in advance!
You could use backports.org. It doesn't look as though they have
swfdec-mozilla, but if you want to install any other packages from
testing/unstable you can either download the deb's from
http://www.backports.org/ or add
'deb http://www.backports.org/debian lenny-backports main contrib non-free'
to your sources.list. You'll then need to update ('aptitude update') as
usual, and specify to install from backports for the package you want.
e.g, 'aptitude -t lenny-backports install package-you-want' Hope that
was of some help.
- --
Thanks for the help! Backports is indeed a good option for some
packages. Off course not all packages can be available in backports and
therefor I wonder what is the best way to proceed. Or more specifically
which of aforementioned 4 options is preferred when you want a package
in testing/unstable that is not in backports?
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
Aniruddha wrote: I would like to install the latest version swfdec-mozilla (because it offers autoplay). I intent to track stable as closely as possible. As far I can tell there are four possibilities to achieve this: 1) Temporary enable testing/unstable repositories and install the program 2) Download *.deb from packages.debian org 3) Use apt-pinning 4) Compile from source, this requires option 1 to be enabled. I use apt-pinning and it works really well. I followed the Debian apt-pinning howto and now run a mix of Testing and Unstable. http://wiki.debian.org/AptPinning -- J -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 4:38 PM, JoeHill joeh...@teksavvy.com wrote: Aniruddha wrote: I would like to install the latest version swfdec-mozilla (because it offers autoplay). I intent to track stable as closely as possible. As far I can tell there are four possibilities to achieve this: 1) Temporary enable testing/unstable repositories and install the program 2) Download *.deb from packages.debian org 3) Use apt-pinning 4) Compile from source, this requires option 1 to be enabled. I use apt-pinning and it works really well. I followed the Debian apt-pinning howto and now run a mix of Testing and Unstable. http://wiki.debian.org/AptPinning -- Thanks for the tip. Are there any downsides to be expected from this method? e.g. accidentally pulling in dependencies for lots of packages turning my 'stable' into 'testing'. Is this a better option then temporary enabling testing/unstable repositories or downloading the debs from the debian.packages.org? And if so why? I'm really curious to find the best way to run stable while installing an occasional testing/unstable package. :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
Aniruddha wrote: On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 4:38 PM, JoeHill joeh...@teksavvy.com wrote: Aniruddha wrote: I would like to install the latest version swfdec-mozilla (because it offers autoplay). I intent to track stable as closely as possible. As far I can tell there are four possibilities to achieve this: 1) Temporary enable testing/unstable repositories and install the program 2) Download *.deb from packages.debian org 3) Use apt-pinning 4) Compile from source, this requires option 1 to be enabled. I use apt-pinning and it works really well. I followed the Debian apt-pinning howto and now run a mix of Testing and Unstable. http://wiki.debian.org/AptPinning -- Thanks for the tip. Are there any downsides to be expected from this method? e.g. accidentally pulling in dependencies for lots of packages turning my 'stable' into 'testing'. Well, there's no 'accidental' about anything ;) You just have to pay attention when you install something to see what changes it's making to your system. Aptitude is not going to surprise you unless you are perhaps asleep... :-\ Is this a better option then temporary enabling testing/unstable repositories or downloading the debs from the debian.packages.org? And if so why? I don't know much about Debian, but I know this is a really really bad idea. Aptitude is an incredibly intelligent system for managing dependencies, let it do it's job and don't fsck with it. I'm really curious to find the best way to run stable while installing an occasional testing/unstable package. :) Pinning is the best way to go for this. This way, Aptitude can keep things nice and tidy for you. You will not be impervious to bugs, but you will be far better off than trying to keep track of things yourself. -- J -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: What is the preferred way to install packages from testing/unstable in stable?
On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 21:50 +0200, Aniruddha wrote:
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 4:38 PM, JoeHill joeh...@teksavvy.com wrote:
Aniruddha wrote:
I would like to install the latest version swfdec-mozilla (because it
offers autoplay). I intent to track stable as closely as possible. As
far I can tell there are four possibilities to achieve this:
1) Temporary enable testing/unstable repositories and install the program
2) Download *.deb from packages.debian org
3) Use apt-pinning
4) Compile from source, this requires option 1 to be enabled.
I use apt-pinning and it works really well. I followed the Debian
apt-pinning
howto and now run a mix of Testing and Unstable.
http://wiki.debian.org/AptPinning
--
Thanks for the tip. Are there any downsides to be expected from this
method? e.g. accidentally pulling in dependencies for lots of packages
turning my 'stable' into 'testing'. Is this a better option then
temporary enabling testing/unstable repositories or downloading the
debs from the debian.packages.org? And if so why? I'm really curious
to find the best way to run stable while installing an occasional
testing/unstable package. :)
There are always downsides. :-)
You won't accidentally pull lots of packages from testing unless you
aren't paying attention. That's important: pay attention. That said,
as long as you do pay attention and don't go blindly installing testing
or unstable packages, you should be fine.
I use a pretty conservative pinning, more conservative than what is
given on the wiki. Mine is taken from Martin Krafft's book The Debian
System, recently recommended on this list:
mcu...@drifter:~$ cat /etc/apt/apt.conf
APT::Default-Release stable;
APT::Cache-Limit 33554432;
mcu...@drifter:~$ cat /etc/apt/preferences
Package: *
Pin: release a=stable
Pin-Priority: 900
Package: *
Pin: release a=testing
Pin-Priority: 90
Package: *
Pin: release a=unstable
Pin-Priority: 80
With some packages, attempting to install them from testing or unstable
causes no issues whatsoever. For example, I recently installed zim from
testing (zim-0.28-1), rather than stable (zim-0.25.1), because the newer
version has several improvements. zim-0.28-1 only depends on packages
that are already in stable, so it didn't pull in any dependencies from
testing and didn't require any other upgrades. OTOH, look at what would
happen if I tried to upgrade transmission from stable to testing:
mcu...@drifter:~$ sudo aptitude install -s -t testing transmission
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Reading extended state information
Initializing package states... Done
Reading task descriptions... Done
The following packages are BROKEN:
gtk2-engines-pixbuf libc6-i386 locales
The following NEW packages will be installed:
libgssapi-krb5-2{a} libk5crypto3{a} libkrb5-3{a} libkrb5support0{a}
The following packages will be upgraded:
libc6 libdbus-glib-1-2 libgcrypt11 libglib2.0-0 libgnutls26
libgpg-error0 libgtk2.0-0 libnotify1 libpcre3 libtasn1-3
libxrandr2 transmission transmission-cli transmission-common
transmission-gtk
The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed:
libglib2.0-data
15 packages upgraded, 4 newly installed, 0 to remove and 547 not
upgraded.
Need to get 11.3MB of archives. After unpacking 3309kB will be used.
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libc6-i386: Depends: libc6 (= 2.7-18) but 2.9-4 is to be installed.
locales: Depends: glibc-2.7-1 which is a virtual package.
gtk2-engines-pixbuf: Depends: libgtk2.0-0 (= 2.12.12-1~lenny1) but
2.16.1-2 is to be installed.
The following actions will resolve these dependencies:
Upgrade the following packages:
gtk2-engines-pixbuf [2.12.12-1~lenny1 (stable, now) - 2.16.1-2
(testing, unstable)]
libc6-i386 [2.7-18 (stable, now) - 2.9-4 (testing)]
locales [2.7-18 (stable, now) - 2.9-4 (testing)]
Score is 200
Accept this solution? [Y/n/q/?]
You can see that would be more disruptive. The good thing is aptitude
will tell you what it wants to do to satisfy your request, and you can
fiddle with it or reconsider whether your request is worth the potential
for trouble.
I suggest using the -s (--simulate) option anytime you are thinking
about installing a package from testing or unstable, just to give
yourself that much more forewarning about what might happen. If you do
end up taking the plunge with some packages that are really important to
you and wind up with substantial chunks of testing mixed in with your
stable system, then you probably also would want to be very careful
everytime you 'safe-upgrade,' maybe using the -s option there too.
Personally, I am being pretty conservative about the whole thing and
only installing a few packages here and there where the gain is
noticable and the pain is negligible.
Pinning gives you enough ammunition to shoot yourself in the foot (or
even shoot your whole leg off), but you won't
