On Sat 27 Nov 2021 at 19:07:14 (+0000), Tim Woodall wrote: > On Sat, 27 Nov 2021, Dan Ritter wrote: > > Tim Woodall wrote: > > > Can anyone tell me exactly what this Pin line I have actually does - or > > > even better point me to a webpage that has more than "if you want to do > > > this use this" type of example? > > > > > > (FTAOD I know that this isn't right and is inconsistent but before I > > > start changing it I want to really understand what it's currently doing) > > > > > > I have a local repository: > > > > > > Codename: buster > > > Components: main > > > Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 19:42:12 +0000 > > > Description: Debs for local installing > > > Label: local debs > > > Origin: local debs > > > Suite: oldstable > > > > > > And I have a pin (which I've failed to update since bullseye became > > > stable hence the a=stable) > > > > > > Package: * > > > Pin: release o=local debs,a=stable,n=buster,l=local debs,c=main,b=amd64 > > > Pin-Priority: 900 > > > > man apt_preferences # go ahead and read it, it's well-organized > > > > Many thanks. I think I've been lucky and stumbled into something that > worked for me but isn't very robust. > > I've never set a default release, I've never added (except for sources) > sources.list entries other than for things I've wanted installed. So the > 900 worked. > > Need to think about whether I want to change that - I cannot immediately > see how it improves things for me but it might make sense to change if > that's what everybody else does. It will undoubtedly cause me > head-scratching when I upgrade to Trixy and it doesn't work... > > > > > I'm trying to solve a (minor) problem I'm having during upgrades from > > > buster to bullseye where I've backported make from bullseye to buster. > > > So on my buster systems I have: > > > make/oldstable,now 4.3-4.1+tjw10r1 amd64 [installed] > > > > > > while once I've upgraded to bullseye I want to "downgrade" from my > > > backported package to make 4.3-4.1 and then continue to track bullseye. > > > > You will need a priority over 1000. > > > > I don't recommend this, but you get to keep all the pieces. > > > > Yes, I don't think I can do this with a generic pin. Maybe pinning > origin "" to -100 might work - not sure if that will uninstall or > downgrade (I'll experiment). I think adding explicit pins to my > 'bullseye-local-sources' package for these packages I want to downgrade > might be my only option. For the two packages I have that I want to > downgrade during the update to bullseye it's easy enough to manually fix > and I haven't yet had to backport anything to bullseye that won't keep a > patched version during the upgrade to Trixy. > > Thanks for the pointers.
The obvious way to do this would seem to be using an epoch, like 5:, to give your package priority over newer versions. This is standard practice for self-compiled kernels, because newer versions are being released all the time. Should you chance upon https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/FAQ, note that those exhortations apply to packages being placed into shared repositories, not to personal usage like yours. > > > When debian went from v2.2 potato to v3 woody, would this pin stop > > > working? Because woody would be stable and potato oldstable at that > > > point. Epochs are unaffected by any such considerations: they override the whole versioning system. BTW I can't recall seeing an official Debian epoch as high as 2: though someone will probably correct me. Cheers, David.