On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 02:16:39PM -0700, Adam Conrad wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:31:54AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > That works for a silo, because with a silo you want to install *all* of the > > packages from the ppa together, and pull any additional dependencies from > > the main archive. For -proposed, we explicitly want to pick and choose > > *which* packages we are pulling from -proposed vs. the release pocket, > > because -proposed always contains multiple unrelated "landings" at the same > > time and we want to be able to disambiguate the test results so we know > > which package introduces the regression. > Robert's still on the right track here, though. This is just poor use of > pinning. See the following: > (wily-amd64)root@nosferatu:~# cat /etc/apt/preferences.d/10adt-pinning > Package: * > Pin: release a=xenial > Pin-Priority: 900 > Package: * > Pin: release a=xenial-proposed > Pin-Priority: 800 > (wily-amd64)root@nosferatu:~# apt-get dist-upgrade > Reading package lists... Done > Building dependency tree > Reading state information... Done > Calculating upgrade... Done > 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. So the notable difference between this, and what autopkgtest is currently doing, is the use of a Pin-Priority of 800 vs. 100. Martin, do you want to check that raising the pin priority for xenial-proposed solves the problems we were seeing earlier? Thanks for the clarification, Adam! -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
