On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 08:35:51PM -0500, Charles Kroeger wrote: > hummm...I don't know but I care nothing for these code words squeeze wheezy > sid > etc. I prefer good 'ol stable testing unstable experimental.
They both serve their own purposes. The code names continue to point at the same release, even when it changes from being testing to stable, or stable to oldstable. > Try these in your 'sources.list as well: snip > deb http://debian.lcs.mit.edu/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free > deb-src http://debian.lcs.mit.edu/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free > > deb http://debian.lcs.mit.edu/debian/ experimental main contrib non-free > deb-src http://debian.lcs.mit.edu/debian/ experimental main contrib non-free Dangerous unless you have also set up pinning properly. > I would instead suggest to make or put into your /etc/apt/preferences file: > > Package: debian-reference-fr (en?) > Pin: release a=unstable > Pin-Priority: 500 > > Package: debian-reference-common > Pin: release a=unstable > Pin-Priority: 500 These particular pinning rules will not prevent unstable packages being installed if you go for the above stanzes in the sources.list file. > and in your /etc/apt/apt.conf file: > > APT::Default-Release "unstable"; That will force the user to unstable. They want to use wheezy! > Build-Essential "build-essential"; > Clean-Installed "true"; > Immediate-Configure "true"; // DO NOT turn this off, see the man page > Force-LoopBreak "false"; // DO NOT turn this on, see the man page > Install-Recommends "true"; > Install-Suggests "false"; These are all the default apt values. Why bother writing them out in the config? > Ignore-Hold "false"; > Cache-Start "20971520"; > Cache-Grow "1048576"; > Cache-Limit "0"; > Default-Release ""; I can't see the relevance of any of these for the problem at hand. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121204093037.GA13258@debian
