[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#429551: marked as done (Remove /usr/bin/apt-get from apt, include (or depend) aptitude)

Your message dated Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:02:49 +0100
with message-id <20140212120249.GD22612@crossbow>
and subject line Re: Remove /usr/bin/apt-get from apt, include (or depend) aptitude
has caused the Debian Bug report #429551,
regarding Remove /usr/bin/apt-get from apt, include (or depend) aptitude
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
429551: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=429551
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: apt
Version: 0.6.46.4-0.1
Severity: normal


The current apt package includes /usr/bin/apt-get.

The prior stable release (4.0 "etch") of Debian specifies aptitude as
the preferred package management front-end for apt, specified in
multiple places, e.g.:  Release Notes for Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 ("etch")
section 2.1.1 "Package Management"

  http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/release-notes/ch-whats-new.en.html

There's considerable confusion in support channels and documentation
over whether apt-get or aptitude should be used for package maintenance.  

It would be preferred if Debian's own package management tool reflected
documentation in _not_ including by default the deprecated package
management tool.

Suggestion:  split apt-get into its own separate package.  Change
dependency on aptitude from "Suggests" to "Depends".


-- Package-specific info:

-- apt-config dump --

APT "";
APT::Architecture "i386";
APT::Build-Essential "";
APT::Build-Essential:: "build-essential";
APT::Cache-Limit "50331648";
Dir "/";
Dir::State "var/lib/apt/";
Dir::State::lists "lists/";
Dir::State::cdroms "cdroms.list";
Dir::State::userstatus "status.user";
Dir::State::status "/var/lib/dpkg/status";
Dir::Cache "var/cache/apt/";
Dir::Cache::archives "archives/";
Dir::Cache::srcpkgcache "srcpkgcache.bin";
Dir::Cache::pkgcache "pkgcache.bin";
Dir::Etc "etc/apt/";
Dir::Etc::sourcelist "sources.list";
Dir::Etc::sourceparts "sources.list.d";
Dir::Etc::vendorlist "vendors.list";
Dir::Etc::vendorparts "vendors.list.d";
Dir::Etc::main "apt.conf";
Dir::Etc::parts "apt.conf.d";
Dir::Etc::preferences "preferences";
Dir::Bin "";
Dir::Bin::methods "/usr/lib/apt/methods";
Dir::Bin::dpkg "/usr/bin/dpkg";
DPkg "";
DPkg::Pre-Install-Pkgs "";
DPkg::Pre-Install-Pkgs:: "/usr/sbin/dpkg-preconfigure --apt || true";
DPkg::Post-Invoke "";
DPkg::Post-Invoke:: "if [ -x /usr/bin/debsums ]; then /usr/bin/debsums --generate=nocheck -sp /var/cache/apt/archives; fi";

-- /etc/apt/preferences --

Package: *
Pin: release a=testing
Pin-Priority: 950

Package: *
Pin: release a=stable
Pin-Priority: 750

Package: *
Pin: release a=unstable
Pin-Priority: 400

-- /etc/apt/sources.list --

deb http://ftp.debian.org sarge main

# ----------------------------------------------------------------------
# Mirrors tried.  See /var/lib/apt-spy/mirrors.txt (or
# http://www.debian.org/mirrors/) for listing
#
# http.us.debian.org /debian/
# linux.csua.berkeley.edu /debian/
# mirror.anl.gov /debian/
# ----------------------------------------------------------------------

# Testing 
deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
# jdeb     http://mirror.anl.gov/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
# deb-src http://mirror.anl.gov/debian/ testing main contrib non-free

# Testing security
deb     http://security.debian.org/ testing/updates main contrib non-free

# Unstable
deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
# deb     http://mirror.anl.gov/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
# deb-src http://mirror.anl.gov/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free

# Stable
deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
# deb http://mirror.anl.gov/debian stable main contrib non-free

# Stable security
deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free



# ------------------------------------------------------------
# Extras
# ------------------------------------------------------------
# Mmmmultimedia....
deb http://www.debian-multimedia.org etch main

-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (950, 'testing'), (750, 'stable'), (500, 'oldstable'), (400, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-4-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages apt depends on:
ii  debian-archive-keyring  2007.02.19-0.1   GnuPG archive keys of the Debian a
ii  libc6                   2.5-9+b1         GNU C Library: Shared libraries
ii  libgcc1                 1:4.2-20070528-1 GCC support library
ii  libstdc++6              4.2-20070528-1   The GNU Standard C++ Library v3

apt recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
> It would be preferred if Debian's own package management tool reflected
> documentation in _not_ including by default the deprecated package
> management tool.

Fast-forward 6 years and we had at least two releases in which apt-get
was the recommend way of performing the upgrade. Debian isn't about
choice as we are frequently told nowadays, but in this case we have the
choice (in some way) and they are perfectly compatible and suit
different userbases/patterns, so that seems okay.

I don't think leaving this bug open, even as wontfix, is helping us in
anyway expect maybe suggesting that this could be a distant future plan
(it is not, but what can be planed… as this very bug shows).
So closing as not relevant anymore.


Best regards

David Kalnischkies

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: