[Lxc-users] Progress Linux upgrade

[Whit Blauvelt]

On Fri, Jan 06, 2012 at 09:47:06PM +0100, Daniel Baumann wrote:

> no offence and no hard feelings, but you seem to lack very basic debian
> knowledge, and in order to give you instruction spelled out for each and
> everything, i would need to know your existing configuration.
> 
> what does 'apt-cache policy lxc' and 'apt-cache policy
> linux-image-2.6-$whatever' (where you replace $whatever with the
> appropriate name for your target machines kernel string) say?

Now Daniel, on the one hand you're favoring people use backports rather than
build stuff themselves - on the basis perhaps that people aren't
knowledgeable enough to build stuff themselves. Well, as a Linux sysadmin
since the earliest Slackware version, I'm used to building stuff myself. So
I admit I lack basic knowledge of using Debian backports. Haven't needed it
since I build from tar by default when it's not in mainline Debian or
Ubuntu. However I expect they should work analogously to, say adding a
repository to CentOS, setting priorities for it, and so forth. I followed
the recipes on your site precisely for adding your repository and setting
the priorities. I'm not saying those recipes were right or wrong. But it if
doesn't work, could the problem be that I tried to take your advice too
literally?

Okay, here's what you've asked for:

# apt-cache policy lxc
lxc:
  Installed: 0.7.2-1
  Candidate: 0.7.2-1
  Version table:
     0.7.5-17~artax1 0
        500 http://archive.progress-linux.org/progress/ artax-backports/main amd64 Packages
     0.7.2-1artax12 0
        500 http://archive.progress-linux.org/progress/ artax/main amd64
Packages
 *** 0.7.2-1 0
        900 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ squeeze/main amd64 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

# apt-cache policy linux-image-amd64
linux-image-amd64:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 2.6.32+29
  Version table:
     3.1+41~artax1 0
        500 http://archive.progress-linux.org/progress/ artax-backports/main
amd64 Packages
     2.6.39+35.1~bpo60+1 0
        100 http://backports.debian.org/debian-backports/
squeeze-backports/main amd64 Packages
     2.6.32+29artax2 0
        500 http://archive.progress-linux.org/progress/ artax/main amd64
Packages
     2.6.32+29 0
        900 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ squeeze/main amd64 Packages

Now I imagine the fault could be in /etc/apt/preferences, which I set per
your example in http://wiki.progress-linux.org/software/apt/ to be as so:

Package: *
Pin: release n=artax
Pin-Priority: 999

Package: *
Pin: release n=artax-security
Pin-Priority: 999

Package: *
Pin: release n=artax-updates
Pin-Priority: 999

Package: *
Pin: release n=artax-backports
Pin-Priority: 999

Package: *
Pin: release o=Debian,a=stable
Pin-Priority: 900

Package: *
Pin: release o=Debian
Pin-Priority: -10

Okay, "man apt_preferences" tells us 

  990 < P <=1000
      causes a version to be installed even if it does not come from the target release, unless the installed version is more recent. 

So it sure looks like pin-priority 999 should result in apt preferring your
artax stuff. But it doesn't. In fact looking at the apt-cache policy output
it looks like the priorities aren't being matched to your stuff correctly.
Don't ask me why, of course. You're the expert. It's your config settings
I've literally cut-and-pasted here.

Which gets me back to what seems an honest question, without offense
intended: Why is it really more sensible to spend my time debugging this
stuff than it would be to just build a custom kernel? I suppose the argument
in favor of debugging it is it can help you get the kinks out of your
instructions. Because this is a stock Squeeze installation I'm trying to
install your backports to. And your instructions as they stand are less than
effective.

So please don't think of this as helping me in particular, clueless as I may
be in your eyes. Think of it as helping the next guy or gal who's going to
trip over the same stone in the path if we don't remove it.

Regards,
Whit