mixing unstable with testing just for nvidia: good practices?
in [Debian]
|
From: H.S. on 20 Jun 2008 13:10 Hello, Yesterday I made the jump and put in unstable sources in sources.list in on testing machine solely to get nvidia working again in Testing (what is wrong with testing regarding nvidia anyway?). I have this for my policy: $> cat /etc/apt/apt.conf APT::Authentication::TrustCDROM "true"; Acquire::::Proxy "false"; APT::Default-Release "testing"; Is this good enough for an "aptitude update" and "aptitude safe-upgrade" such that only those package will be pulled from Unstable which are necessary for nvidia related packages? Or should I now just remove the unstable sources' repos from my sources.list file? Recommendations and advice on what is the sensible way to proceed in this are welcome. thanks, ->HS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
From: Jonathan Kaye on 20 Jun 2008 13:50 H.S. wrote: > Hello, > > Yesterday I made the jump and put in unstable sources in sources.list in > on testing machine solely to get nvidia working again in Testing (what > is wrong with testing regarding nvidia anyway?). > > I have this for my policy: > $> cat /etc/apt/apt.conf > APT::Authentication::TrustCDROM "true"; > Acquire::::Proxy "false"; > APT::Default-Release "testing"; > > > Is this good enough for an "aptitude update" and "aptitude safe-upgrade" > such that only those package will be pulled from Unstable which are > necessary for nvidia related packages? Or should I now just remove the > unstable sources' repos from my sources.list file? > > Recommendations and advice on what is the sensible way to proceed in > this are welcome. > > thanks, > ->HS Hi HS, I am also running Lenny with some Sid mixed in (but mostly Lenny). I don't even have a /etc/apt/apt.conf file on my system. I do my "mixing" in the following way. I have a file called /etc/apt/preferences which looks like this: Package: * Pin: release o=Debian,a=unstable Pin-Priority: 600 Package: * Pin: release o=Debian,a=testing Pin-Priority: 650 I also have both Lenny and Sid sources in my sources.list file. If I don't do anything special then I get the Lenny version of a package (unless that particular package was already unstable by an earlier choice). To get the unstable version I do this: #aptitude -t unstable install <name of package> This is called "pinning", I believe. Works for me. Cheers, Jonathan -- Registerd Linux user #445917 at http://counter.li.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
From: H.S. on 20 Jun 2008 14:50 Jonathan Kaye wrote: <SNIP> > particular package was already unstable by an earlier choice). To get the > unstable version I do this: > #aptitude -t unstable install <name of package> > This is called "pinning", I believe. > Works for me. > Cheers, > Jonathan Ah, the pinning. I took your example and tweaked it a bit (after consulting http://wiki.debian.org/AptPreferences) and now have this: -------------------------------------------------------------- $> cat /etc/apt/apt.conf APT::Authentication::TrustCDROM "true"; Acquire::::Proxy "false"; APT::Default-Release "testing"; $> cat /etc/apt/preferences Package: * Pin: release o=Debian,a=testing Pin-Priority: 900 Package: * Pin: release o=Debian,a=unstable Pin-Priority: 300 $> -------------------------------------------------------------- And I also have unstable sources in my sources.list in otherwise testing sources. I have also installed nvidia related stuff from unstable. Now, given above preferences, I get this if I try safe-upgrade: -------------------------------------------------------------- $> sudo aptitude -dV safe-upgrade Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Reading extended state information Initializing package states... Done Reading task descriptions... Done Resolving dependencies... The following packages have been kept back: cpp-3.4 gcc-3.4 gcc-3.4-base The following packages will be upgraded: libbtutil-utils [0.0.19+p4.2340-1 -> 0.0.19+p4.2340-1.1] libbtutil0 [0.0.19+p4.2340-1 -> 0.0.19+p4.2340-1.1] ntp [1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-5 -> 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-6] ntpdate [1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-5 -> 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-6] nvidia-kernel-source [169.12-4 -> 173.14.09-1] The following packages are RECOMMENDED but will NOT be installed: nvidia-glx 5 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 3 not upgraded. Need to get 5589kB of archives. After unpacking 94.2kB will be freed. Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] Writing extended state information... Done Get:1 http://gulus.usherbrooke.ca unstable/main libbtutil0 0.0.19+p4.2340-1.1 [113kB] Get:2 http://gulus.usherbrooke.ca unstable/main libbtutil-utils 0.0.19+p4.2340-1.1 [6082B] Get:3 http://gulus.usherbrooke.ca unstable/main ntp 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-6 [434kB] Get:4 http://gulus.usherbrooke.ca unstable/main ntpdate 1:4.2.4p4+dfsg-6 [59.6kB] Get:5 http://gulus.usherbrooke.ca unstable/non-free nvidia-kernel-source 173.14.09-1 [4976kB] Fetched 5589kB in 10s (551kB/s) Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree Reading state information... Done Reading extended state information Initializing package states... Done Reading task descriptions... Done -------------------------------------------------------------- So, how come I am still getting ntp and ntpdate from unstable? I don't think they are related to nvidia. What am I missing here? Is it possible that while installing nvidia I also pulled some other packages that were in unstable (I didn't have preferences file earlier)? thanks, ->HS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
From: Florian Kulzer on 20 Jun 2008 15:30 On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 14:44:21 -0400, H.S. wrote: > Jonathan Kaye wrote: > <SNIP> >> particular package was already unstable by an earlier choice). To get the >> unstable version I do this: >> #aptitude -t unstable install <name of package> >> This is called "pinning", I believe. >> Works for me. >> Cheers, >> Jonathan > > > Ah, the pinning. I took your example and tweaked it a bit (after > consulting http://wiki.debian.org/AptPreferences) and now have this: > -------------------------------------------------------------- > $> cat /etc/apt/apt.conf > APT::Authentication::TrustCDROM "true"; > Acquire::::Proxy "false"; > APT::Default-Release "testing"; > $> cat /etc/apt/preferences > Package: * > Pin: release o=Debian,a=testing > Pin-Priority: 900 > > Package: * > Pin: release o=Debian,a=unstable > Pin-Priority: 300 > > $> > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > And I also have unstable sources in my sources.list in otherwise testing > sources. I have also installed nvidia related stuff from unstable. [...] > So, how come I am still getting ntp and ntpdate from unstable? I don't > think they are related to nvidia. What am I missing here? Is it possible > that while installing nvidia I also pulled some other packages that were > in unstable (I didn't have preferences file earlier)? Both ntp and ntpdate are not in testing right now (a licensing issue IIRC), so they have to come from unstable. When in doubt, use "apt-cache policy ...": apt-cache policy ntp ntpdate -- Regards, | http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer Florian | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
From: H.S. on 20 Jun 2008 16:00 Florian Kulzer wrote: > > Both ntp and ntpdate are not in testing right now (a licensing issue > IIRC), so they have to come from unstable. When in doubt, use "apt-cache > policy ...": > > apt-cache policy ntp ntpdate > Thanks for the tip. To avoid such updates, I have removed the unstable sources from my sources.list for now. I think I will included it on a need by need basis (primarily for nvidia ... whenever that happens in Debian, and I am *not* holding my breath). regards. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 Prev: eth0: no IPv6 router present - resolved, thanks Next: Balsa's "Gnome editor?" |