Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #242518
| From | Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: Apt pinning. |
| Date | 2021-11-29 18:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DoSNb-3y8-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <DokBQ-8mD-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <DomDE-1av-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <DoGVI-4KJ-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <DoRo5-2Q4-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <DoRHr-2Wj-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
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. > $ dpkg --compare-versions 0.4b46-8+tjw10r1 lt 0.4b46-8 && echo "0.4b46-8 > is newer" || echo "0.4b46-8 is not newer" > 0.4b46-8 is not newer > > $ dpkg --compare-versions 0.4b46-8~tjw10r1 lt 0.4b46-8 && echo "0.4b46-8 > is newer" || echo "0.4b46-8 is not newer" > 0.4b46-8 is newer > > As I understand matters, a version "foo~" will always compare as lower > than a version "foo", and this is specifically to make it possible to do > fancy things like what you're apparently aiming for here. > > That won't help you with your current set of local packages - but if you > switch to that for any ones you build in the future, it might give you a > path to the end state you're hoping for. > > 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!
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Apt pinning. Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> - 2021-11-27 12:00 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-11-27 14:10 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> - 2021-11-27 20:10 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-11-28 06:10 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> - 2021-11-28 08:20 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-11-29 06:00 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> - 2021-11-29 17:10 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-11-29 17:30 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. Tim Woodall <debianuser@woodall.me.uk> - 2021-11-29 18:40 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2021-11-30 05:50 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-11-28 12:20 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2021-11-28 16:00 +0100
Re: Apt pinning. Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-12-05 16:30 +0100
csiph-web