Timeline for apt pinning priority restricted
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 21, 2016 at 14:18 | vote | accept | Michael | ||
| Mar 21, 2016 at 14:13 | answer | added | Wouter Verhelst | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 21, 2016 at 14:11 | history | edited | Michael | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3409 characters in body
|
| Mar 21, 2016 at 14:10 | comment | added | Michael | Well, it's quite lengthy stuff, didn't want to clutter up everything | |
| Mar 21, 2016 at 14:07 | comment | added | Wouter Verhelst | Please don't use a paste bin, just edit the question and add the information. Otherwise a person later looking at this doesn't get all the information... | |
| Mar 21, 2016 at 14:02 | comment | added | Michael | @WouterVerhelst here is the snippet: pastebin.com/CDRNXhU4 I wonder why there are no pinned packages marked, though ... | |
| Mar 21, 2016 at 14:01 | comment | added | Michael | @Questionmark This just says, everything is up to date and does nothing. | |
| Mar 20, 2016 at 18:54 | answer | added | Faheem Mitha | timeline score: 6 | |
| Mar 20, 2016 at 18:49 | answer | added | Ferenc Wágner | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 19, 2016 at 10:42 | comment | added | Wouter Verhelst |
Can you run apt-cache policy without any arguments, and add the output to the question?
|
|
| Mar 18, 2016 at 19:37 | comment | added | Questionmark |
Just run apt upgrade -t stable... Does that work for you?
|
|
| Mar 18, 2016 at 19:32 | history | asked | Michael | CC BY-SA 3.0 |