1 |
You can "pin" a package. Just put ">=app-grp/appname-x.y.z" into |
2 |
/var/cache/edb/world and emerge -u world won't try to downgrade, or use |
3 |
= instead of >= and it will never try to change the version at all. |
4 |
|
5 |
Caleb |
6 |
|
7 |
On Thu, 2003-01-30 at 14:18, Louis-Philippe Brochu wrote: |
8 |
> > One way to do it: remove whatever packages you do not want touched by |
9 |
> > "world" out of /var/cache/edb/world. The packages in that file are the |
10 |
> > only ones that will get looked at whenever you run 'emerge -u world'. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> Well there is two problems with this approach. First one is that by |
13 |
> removing this package from the world file it will not be updated anymore |
14 |
> when a new version (newer than the one installed) is released. Second |
15 |
> problem is that this hack won't work if the package removed from the world |
16 |
> file is required as a dependency for another package you're trying to |
17 |
> install. Portage will resolve the denpendency, will want to install your |
18 |
> package and will downgrade it. |
19 |
> |
20 |
> > Secondarily, I suggest running 'emerge -up world' to see what would be |
21 |
> > downgraded first, without actually running anything. |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> > Automatic downgrading is generally healthy behavior (if for example, we |
24 |
> > unmasked a new version which later proved broken/unstable, therefore we |
25 |
> > need people to revert to an older, stable release). |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Yes but there should be a way to disable this. An option to "pin" a |
28 |
> minimum version of a package or to simply disable the possibility of |
29 |
> downgrading a package (with a switch on the command line or better, a |
30 |
> configurable option in /etc/make.conf). |
31 |
> |
32 |
> The case you are talking about *should* pratically never happen if |
33 |
> packages we're tested *before* being released. |
34 |
> |
35 |
> > This is a FAQ... I'm sure there are some enhancements to Portage |
36 |
> > underway which will make this issue more elegant/intuitive. |
37 |
> |
38 |
> I really hope the Gentoo developpers will add this functionnality. Ever |
39 |
> since the introduction for the ~arch keywords packages updates have been a |
40 |
> mess for me. If you are running on a stable system exclusively everything |
41 |
> is fine. Same thing if you are running exclusively with an unstable system |
42 |
> (with ~arch). If you never use the emerge world command you should not |
43 |
> have many problems, just define the ACCEPT_KEYWORDS before emerging |
44 |
> unstable packages and you're ok. |
45 |
> |
46 |
> The problem comes when you are using stable *and* unstable *and* emerge |
47 |
> world command. Try to emerge world a mix of stable and unstable packages |
48 |
> and see all the packages downgrades. Try to define ACCEPT_KEYWORDS, now |
49 |
> Portage wants to install all unstable packages. Mask the old version of |
50 |
> unstable packages you installed (or just remove them from the world file) |
51 |
> and watch Portage trying to resolve a dependency for another packages and |
52 |
> downgrade your package anyway... The only thing Portage need is a |
53 |
> "don't-ever-downgrade-my-packages" function IMHO. |
54 |
> |
55 |
> |
56 |
> |
57 |
> -- |
58 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
59 |
-- |
60 |
/*--------------------------------------------------------------------- |
61 |
Caleb Shay "UNIX _IS_ user friendly. |
62 |
Programmer/System Administrator It's just particular about |
63 |
Providence, RI who its friends are." |
64 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------*/ |
65 |
|
66 |
|
67 |
-- |
68 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |