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

Bug#765313: marked as done ([apt] Please split the apt binary package)

Your message dated Thu, 13 Aug 2015 23:54:05 +0200
with message-id <20150813235159.GA12958@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#765313: [apt] Please split the apt binary package
has caused the Debian Bug report #765313,
regarding [apt] Please split the apt binary package
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.)


-- 
765313: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=765313
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: apt
Version: 1.0.9.2
Severity: wishlist

Following commit b463a73a03a50d886edef176fbdb5827e675d64b, the apt binary package is described as a "commandline package manager":
This package provides commandline tools for searching and
managing as well as querying information about packages
as a low-level access to all features of the libapt-pkg library.

Of course, this is just one component of apt, which is a dependency of all APT-based package managers.

I wanted to request a change to descriptions, but descriptions would be simplified and apt would be lighter by splitting the "commandline package manager" part into another package. This package could be named apt-cli. It would certainly contain /usr/bin/apt and apt-get. The apt binary package should keep library files, manual pages / configuration as well as anything needed by APT-based package managers.

I recommend to have the apt binary package recommend "apt-cli", at least initially. For transitional reasons, this should probably even be an absolute dependency, unless the package containing the core APT is renamed, in which case apt could be a transitional package depending on apt-cli.
-- 
Filipus Klutiero
http://www.philippecloutier.com

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 09:47:57PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> Package: apt
> Version: 1.0.9.2
> Severity: wishlist
> 
> Following commit b463a73a03a50d886edef176fbdb5827e675d64b <http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/apt/apt.git/commit/debian/control?id=b463a73a03a50d886edef176fbdb5827e675d64b>, the apt binary package is described as a "commandline package manager":
> >This package provides commandline tools for searching and
> >managing as well as querying information about packages
> >as a low-level access to all features of the libapt-pkg library.
> 
> Of course, this is just one component of apt, which is a dependency of all APT-based package managers.
> 
> I wanted to request a change to descriptions, but descriptions would be simplified and apt would be lighter by splitting the "commandline package manager" part into another package. This package could be named apt-cli. It would certainly contain /usr/bin/apt and apt-get. The apt binary package should keep library files, manual pages / configuration as well as anything needed by APT-based package managers.
> 
> I recommend to have the apt binary package recommend "apt-cli", at least initially. For transitional reasons, this should probably even be an absolute dependency, unless the package containing the core APT is renamed, in which case apt could be a transitional package depending on apt-cli.
> 

No. Never, ever. That's a really bad idea. The libraries are not even in apt, they
are in their own packages. apt contains all command-line APT tools (using apt-pkg),
and especially 'apt' nowadays. And having a binary of the same name as the package
is always a good idea :)

Closing.

-- 
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: