Bug#457995: new update/revision announcement pages confusing about aptitude/apt

[Luk Claes <luk@debian.org>]

Philippe Cloutier wrote:
> Le December 27, 2007 03:47:40 pm Luk Claes, vous avez écrit :
>> Philippe Cloutier wrote:
>>> Le December 27, 2007 03:26:11 pm Luk Claes, vous avez écrit :
>>>> Philippe Cloutier wrote:
>>>>> Le December 27, 2007 03:12:22 pm Jose Luis Rivas Contreras, vous avez
>>> écrit :
>>>>>> Philippe Cloutier wrote:
>>>>>>> Package: www.debian.org
>>>>>>> Severity: minor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As its predecessor, http://www.us.debian.org/News/2007/20071227
>>>>>>> contains
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Upgrading to this revision online is usually done by pointing the
>>>>>>> aptitude (or apt) package tool (see the sources.list(5) manual page)
>>>>>>> to one of Debian's many FTP or HTTP mirrors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This can confuse readers about what apt and aptitude are, suggesting
>>>>>>> that one can use one or the other. This should probably read "by
>>>>>>> pointing the Advanced Packaging Tool (APT) (see the sources.list(5)
>>>>>>> manual page) to [...]".
>>>>>> You can use one or the other, depending on which one you prefer to
>>>>>> use.
>>>>> Actually, you have to use APT, since aptitude uses APT. The problem is
>>>>> precisely that the announcement suggests that aptitude does not use
>>>>> APT, which is already a common misconception.
>>>> No, aptitude uses libapt... For an enduser he can choose whatever
>>>> package manager to use, though we recommend aptitude (or apt).
>>> I guess I have not been clear enough about the problem.
>>> The announcement says this:
>>> "You can use A or B."
>>> B being a library used by A, users have to use B anyway, the only choice
>>> is to use A or not. Actually, the choice is which APT front-end to use.
>>>
>>> It could also be changed to "pointing your favorite package manager (such
>>> as aptitude and Synaptic) to [...]" though in reality, you're pointing
>>> APT to a source, and you're only pointing your package manager to a
>>> source indirectly.
>>>
>>> The current sentence is a bit like saying that you can use Debian or
>>> Linux to replace Windows.
>> No, it's not, apt is a package manager, it's libapt that is a library.
> 
> Quoting English Wikipedia:
>> APT is a C++ library of functions (known as libapt) which are used by
>> front-end programs for dealing with packages [...]
> 
> As you can see, APT can be considered as libapt. apt can also be considered as 
> the apt package, but it still contains libapt, so apt either is or contains 
> libapt. Therefore, suggesting that one can use aptitude without using apt is 
> misleading.

Last time: For *end users* apt is a package manager. We recommend to use
aptitude or apt as package manager to upgrade...

Cheers

Luk