> I haven't figured out exactly where the problem is, but a symptom of the
> problem is this:
>
> Upgrade package lxd 2.0.5-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.04.1 to
> 2.8-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.04.1
>
> (from
> https://landscape.is.canonical.com/account/standalone/activity/2208329,
> computer 12351)
>
> 2.8 is from xenial-backports, and Landscape shouldn't try to upgrade to
> it.
Is this not the same problem as LP #1661103 except with an implicit
pin (-backports)?
Björn Tillenius <email address hidden> writes:
> I haven't figured out exactly where the problem is, but a symptom of the ubuntu16. 04.1 to ubuntu16. 04.1 /landscape. is.canonical. com/account/ standalone/ activity/ 2208329,
> problem is this:
>
> Upgrade package lxd 2.0.5-0ubuntu1~
> 2.8-0ubuntu1~
>
> (from
> https:/
> computer 12351)
>
> 2.8 is from xenial-backports, and Landscape shouldn't try to upgrade to
> it.
Is this not the same problem as LP #1661103 except with an implicit
pin (-backports)?
--
James