On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:20:59AM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > What exactly is your complaint here?
All I am hoping for is that much of you wrote in your reply will get documented, right there on the man page for apt-cache policy, etc. Today I don't have Debian here at the public library so this is from memory. > [ ] Version/Pining is more important than the order in sources.list > [ ] apt-cache policy lists sources in reverse order of sources.list > > > The order of sources.list is important only when package+version that > policy decided to use is available from more than one source. Only then > the source listed first is used. So in the example above packages would > be preferably downloaded from ftp.debian.org if and only if both > ftp.debian.org and security.debian.org have the package. OK, just be sure it mentions that on the apt-cache policy man page section... > > Also it is a mystery about how plain "apt-cache policy" sorts its > > output! > > > Seems to be just reverse order of what your sources.list has. OK, hope that will be documented. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
