"Steven E. Harris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nicolas Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > # apt-get install -t unstable monotone > > > > would install the "unstable" version of monotone. > > Is it necessary for me to first add an "unstable" entry or set of > entries to my sources.list file? When I run the simulated/dry-run > version of the install command, using aptitude, it warns
Don't use the "unstable" archive of Debian if you're not doing so already. In fact, as a Debian Developer, I still only run stable: v3.1, a.k.a. Sarge. If you run "unstable" or "testing", you are relegating yourself to having to run "apt-get update/upgrade" nightly to stay abreast with the changes. You can do it, but that's the trade-off. Personally, I just use the backports.org version or build it myself. > Running apt-get similarly, I see the following: Yeah, that's what happens. Lots of upgrades that you may not want. You may have to play around with apt preferences (man apt_preferences) to get the right pinning (selection of packages based on component, archive, etc.). Here is mine: Package: * Pin: release a=sarge Pin-Priority: 900 Package: * Pin: release a=unstable Pin-Priority: 50 Package: * Pin: release a=experimental Pin-Priority: -10 Package: debian-keyring Pin: release a=unstable Pin-Priority: 901 Package: tmda Pin: release a=unstable Pin-Priority: 901 Package: python-tmda Pin: release a=unstable Pin-Priority: 901 Package: pbuilder Pin: release a=unstable Pin-Priority: 901 Package: * Pin: release l=Unofficial Multimedia Packages Pin-Priority: -10 Package: * Pin: release l=blackdown Pin-Priority: 501 ccckage: * Pin: release a=sarge-backports Pin-Priority: 200 Package: monotone Pin: release a=sarge-backports Pin-Priority: 999 -- Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.wookimus.net/ assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */ _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel