Bug#791706: marked as done (Documentation out of date)
Your message dated Tue, 7 Jul 2015 20:46:36 +0200
with message-id <20150707204522.GA28871@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#791706: Documentation out of date
has caused the Debian Bug report #791706,
regarding Documentation out of date
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.)
--
791706: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=791706
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: python-apt
Version: 1.0.0~beta3
Example: Find all missing dependencies section of the documentation uses old members such as depends_list instead of dependencies and assumes this list is of Dependency instances and not possibly BaseDependency instances.
I suggest this example code be brought up to date.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 02:29:02PM -0400, Jay Wren wrote:
> Package: python-apt
> Version: 1.0.0~beta3
>
> Example: Find all missing dependencies section of the
> documentation uses old members such as depends_list instead of
> dependencies and assumes this list is of Dependency instances
> and not possibly BaseDependency instances.
>
> I suggest this example code be brought up to date.
You're wrong. This part of the documentation is absolutely
correct and not outdated. There is no BaseDependency in
apt_pkg, and the apt_pkg functions are not "old".
--
Julian Andres Klode - Debian Developer, Ubuntu Member
See http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode and http://jak-linux.org/.
Be friendly, do not top-post, and follow RFC 1855 "Netiquette".
- If you don't I might ignore you.
--- End Message ---
Reply to: