On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 02:16:39PM -0700, Adam Conrad wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:31:54AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > That works for a silo, because with a silo you want to install *all* of the
> > packages from the ppa together, and pull any additional dependencies from
> > the main archive. For -proposed, we explicitly want to pick and choose
> > *which* packages we are pulling from -proposed vs. the release pocket,
> > because -proposed always contains multiple unrelated "landings" at the same
> > time and we want to be able to disambiguate the test results so we know
> > which package introduces the regression.
> Robert's still on the right track here, though. This is just poor use of
> pinning. See the following:
> (wily-amd64)root@nosferatu:~# cat /etc/apt/preferences.d/10adt-pinning
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=xenial
> Pin-Priority: 900
> Package: *
> Pin: release a=xenial-proposed
> Pin-Priority: 800
> (wily-amd64)root@nosferatu:~# apt-get dist-upgrade
> Reading package lists... Done
> Building dependency tree
> Reading state information... Done
> Calculating upgrade... Done
> 0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
So the notable difference between this, and what autopkgtest is currently
doing, is the use of a Pin-Priority of 800 vs. 100. Martin, do you want to
check that raising the pin priority for xenial-proposed solves the problems
we were seeing earlier?
Thanks for the clarification, Adam!
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/