On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 13:54:50 -0800 Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Now 'etch' has priority 990 vs 500 of sid. This will keep the system > > running *unstable* (when etch is released apt will want to upgrade > > to next testing). > > ummm... this, as I understand it, is not correct. priority 990 for the > etch line means that those packages are newer *and* in the target, and > so will be installed. priority 500 means the packages are newer and I was thinking about 'testing' but wrote unstable (I'm actually running sid). > *NOT* in the target and will not be installed. so this will run "etch" > not "unstable". but again, with DefaultRelease pointing to "testing" > what happens with "etch" in stable? default release points to > "testing" but none of the sources.list opint to testing, but instead > to tagged releases. I forgot about that. Rephrasing to: Now 'etch' has priority 990 vs 500 of sid. This will keep the system running testing, but only until etch is released. If the user doesn't add a source for the next testing, the Default-Release option will loose its effect and apt will want to upgrade to unstable. > IMO, this whole situation is too confusing. default release should > accept either form as that is much more intuitive and allows that > wonderful train/platform analogy to actually function properly. As Osamu Aoki pointed out, there is an old bug-report about that. Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]