On 8/13/23 09:46, Antony Stone wrote:
> On Sunday 13 August 2023 at 15:30:51, Ken Dibble wrote:
>
>> On 8/13/23 07:06, Antony Stone wrote:
>>> apt-get source linux-image-amd64=5.10.178-3
>> There it is. The magic formula.
>>
>> This is the first time I have seen getting the source with an "=" sign
>> in it.
> Well, it works for binaries, so I assumed it would work for sources too.
>
>> None of the names available to the user match the source package name.
> Try "apt-cache policy linux-image-amd64"
>
> That should tell you what "Debian version numbers" of the package are
> available.

Doesn't this just kind of prove the premise?

That there are too many inconsistencies, poor documentation and arcane
knowledge for the typical user to be bothered trying to wade through?

>> uname -a
>> Linux thinkstation 5.10.0-23-amd64 #1 SMP Debian 5.10.179-3
>> (2023-07-27) x86_64 GNU/Linux
> Really? *179-3* ?
>
> I have either 178-3 or 179-5 - did your 179-3 come from backports perhaps
> (which you now have commented-out)?

I commented it out at the suggestion of tito because  the use of the

command line apt-get source linux caused me to get the source for
6.something.

I tried fetching the source with backports enabled and disabled with the
required update in between and the  command does not work with backports
and backport source either enabled or disabled in sources.list

>> kdibble@thinkstation:~/Downloads/src$ apt-get source
>> linux-image-amd64=5.10.179-3
>> E: Can not find version '5.10.179-3' of package 'linux-image-amd64'
> Try using "178" instead of "179" :)

How would asking for the source of 178-3 get me the source of 179-3?

Regards,

Ken