Re: apt-get feature question

mike polniak wrote: > When will we see apt 0.4? Sometime before the heat-death of the universe. -- see shy jo

Re: apt-get feature question

Joey Hess wrote: > James Lindenschmidt wrote: > > My question is, could we put a flag in apt-get that specifies whether we > > want > > stable or unstable? Something like this: apt-get install unstable foo? > > You mean "apt-get install foo=unstable". It's already in apt 0.4. Wh

Re: apt-get feature question

James Lindenschmidt wrote: > My question is, could we put a flag in apt-get that specifies whether we want > stable or unstable? Something like this: apt-get install unstable foo? You mean "apt-get install foo=unstable". It's already in apt 0.4. -- see shy jo

Re: apt-get feature question

Quoth David B. Harris, > Since it's generally very unsafe to install testing/unstable binaries on > a Potato system(or mixing binaries of any of the distributions, for that > matter), I'd like to amend this suggestion to the following: > > 'apt-get install unstable foo' > > Compiles package (the

Re: apt-get feature question

To quote James Lindenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, # My question is, could we put a flag in apt-get that specifies whether we want # stable or unstable? Something like this: apt-get install unstable foo? Since it's generally very unsafe to install testing/unstable binaries on a Potato system(or mi

apt-get feature question

Greetings. I love apt-get, but had an idea. Normally I run standard potato, but sometimes I want to get a newer version of an app that lives in unstable. So, in order to install it I have to change my sources.list file and do an apt-get update, then apt-get install foo. Standard stuff. My ques