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. We recommend to use aptitude or apt as package manager to upgrade... Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
