Bug#457995: new update/revision announcement pages confusing about aptitude/apt
Le December 27, 2007 06:36:31 pm Jose Luis Rivas Contreras, vous avez écrit :
> 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"!!
Yes, it's not clear. I opened #458029 about that.
> And does aptitude depends on the apt
> package? No! Depends on libapt! Which is not apt.
It doesn't directly depend on apt, but it does effectively depend on it.
Reply to: