On Sun, 30 May 2021 10:51:14 -0700 Ross Boylan wrote:
> I checked all proposed solutions in aptitude. I think the reason
> exim4-daemon-heavy wasn't proposed was that I didn't have the exim4
> binary (meta) package, which lists both daemons as dependents.
Well, this changes things considerably..
I checked all proposed solutions in aptitude. I think the reason
exim4-daemon-heavy wasn't proposed was that I didn't have the exim4
binary (meta) package, which lists both daemons as dependents.
exim4-base just has a breaks: versioned dependency on both daemons,
but nothing to pull them in. That
On Fri, 28 May 2021 13:59:26 -0700 Ross Boylan wrote:
> Thank you for the quick response.
You are welcome! :-)
> I agree with your conclusion that
> the successful pin removal I triggered in the debugging run of the
> cleanup code probably would have happened the next day. I just
> happened t
Package: apt-listbugs
Version: 0.1.35
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
* What led up to the situation?
Early this month apt-listbugs reported a significant error in
newer versions of exim4, bug 988086. I told it to hold the upgrade.
This pinned exim4-daemon-light, but upgraded a numb
4 matches
Mail list logo
