Bug#457995: new update/revision announcement pages confusing about aptitude/apt
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Philippe Cloutier wrote:
> Le December 27, 2007 04:39:34 pm Luk Claes, vous avez écrit :
>> 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.
> You mean a libapt front-end? If so, which one is it?
>
>
>
Ok, check the description of the apt package:
http://packages.debian.org/sid/apt
"Advanced front-end for dpkg"!! And does aptitude depends on the apt
package? No! Depends on libapt! Which is not apt.
Regards.
- --
Jose Luis Rivas. San Cristóbal, Venezuela. PGP: 0xCACAB118
http://ghostbar.ath.cx/{about,acerca} - http://debian.org.ve
`ghostbar' @ irc.debian.org/#debian-ve,#debian-devel-es
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHdDb/OKCtW8rKsRgRAt1YAJ9fVQs7ezKdgtzvueEbJnf6wgB1LQCcDipF
xnsp+hLd8mQFKAlioQOl0uo=
=q6e6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: