[Aptitude-devel] Bug#346321: aptitude: offers upgrade to exp version (pri -10) instead of unst version (990)

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Thu, 17 Mar 2016, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote:
> 2006-01-07 00:22 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh:
> >Package: aptitude
> >Version: 0.4.1-1
> >Severity: important
> >
> >I am tagging this as important because any bug that makes people install
> >experimental packages unawares is quite problematic :)
> >
> >$ apt-cache policy libarts1c2a
> >libarts1c2a:
> > Installed: 1.4.3-3
> > Candidate: 1.5.0-3
> > Version table:
> >    1.5.0-3 0
> >       990 http://mirrors.kernel.org unstable/main Packages
> >       990 http://ftp.fi.debian.org unstable/main Packages
> >    1.5.0-2 0
> >       -10 http://mirrors.kernel.org experimental/main Packages
> >       -10 http://ftp.fi.debian.org experimental/main Packages
> >*** 1.4.3-3 0
> >       100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
> >
> >However, aptitude does this:
> >libarts1c2a recommends libarts1-akode
> >--\ The following actions will resolve this dependency:
> > -> Upgrade libarts1c2a [1.4.3-3 (now) -> 1.5.0-2 (experimental, experimental)]
> > -> Keep libarts1c2a at version 1.4.3-3 (now)
> > -> Remove libarts1c2a [1.4.3-3 (now)]
> > -> Install libarts1-akode [4:3.5.0-2 (experimental, experimental)]
> > -> Leave the dependency "libarts1c2a recommends libarts1-akode" unresolved.
> >
> >i.e it prefers to install the experimental version, even if it is priority
> >-10. The correct solution is to install libarts1c2a 1.5.0-3, and leave the
> >dependency unresolved.  OR to hold everything.  But installing anything that
> >has a negative priority is a no-no.
> >
> >For reference, my /etc/apt/preferences is:
> >Package: *
> >Pin: release a=experimental
> >Pin-Priority: -10
> 
> This should not happen with "recent" versions of aptitude, recent as in
> the last 6 years at least, because solutions involving installations /
> upgrades of non-default versions are kept in a different level and only
> offered last, if at all, below upgrading to default versions, removing
> it or keeping everything at the same version.
> 
> Have you experience this behaviour recently?

No, but that doesn't mean anything: sometime after I reported the bug, I
disabled experimental, and I don't think I had any reason to reenable it in
the last decade (if I did, I most certainly used a disposable chroot, got
the job done, dropped the chroot in the bitbucket and promptly forgot about
it).

One would have to test current apt (or better yet, stable apt) to be sure.

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh