On Mon 29 Nov 2021 at 17:33:35 (+0000), Tim Woodall wrote: > On Mon, 29 Nov 2021, The Wanderer wrote: > > > > Is there a reason you're using '+' as your separator? > > > Yes - because, for example, squid I'm building with extra settings so I > want my version to be higher than the corresponding buster/bullseye > version. There is no backporting involved. > > > I think this looks like exactly the sort of scenario which '~' is > > intended for. > > > But I didn't know ~ was different. Indeed, for packages I've backported > and want return to mainline eventually it sounds like what I should be > doing for backported packages.
[ … ] > Indeed, sounds perfect. Thank you. I'll have to rework my scripts so I > can choose ~ or + depending on whether I'm backporting a higher version > from a future release or patching the current release. > > I already have config for $source_distribution and $target_distribution > so I might be able to automate the patch version. > > Thats the bit of magic I needed. Thanks! Using these schemes will put your patched versions at the mercy of any other versions entering the repositories: apt will try to upgrade them as soon as a higher version number is seen. You originally wrote "What I want this to do is hold any package in my local repository even if a newer version is present in debian" and "Were a new buster build to happen ([ … ]) I'd want my local version to stay until I patch the new version" which appears to contradict the above. My epoch: method was in answer to your original post, and not the discussion of pinning and upstream-version-debian-revisions that has followed. I illustrated what epochs can do, and I'll leave it at that, because it's unsuitable for what you now appear to need. Cheers, David.