Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1200740 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Roy Orbitson <roy-orbitson@devo.net.au> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-06-13 04:30 +0200 |
| Last post | 2024-06-14 05:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist
Bug#1073119: apt: Clarify dist-upgrade & full-upgrade are identical, and pick one as preferred, in man pages Roy Orbitson <roy-orbitson@devo.net.au> - 2024-06-13 04:30 +0200
Bug#1073119: apt: Clarify dist-upgrade & full-upgrade are identical, and pick one as preferred, in man pages Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org> - 2024-06-13 12:40 +0200
Bug#1073119: apt: Clarify dist-upgrade & full-upgrade are identical, and pick one as preferred, in man pages Roy Orbitson <roy-orbitson@devo.net.au> - 2024-06-14 05:20 +0200
| From | Roy Orbitson <roy-orbitson@devo.net.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-13 04:30 +0200 |
| Subject | Bug#1073119: apt: Clarify dist-upgrade & full-upgrade are identical, and pick one as preferred, in man pages |
| Message-ID | <IOInT-2vU3-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Package: apt Version: 2.7.14build2 Severity: minor Dear Maintainer, The man pages do not make it clear that the full-upgrade and dist-upgrade commands are aliases that perform the same operation. In doc/apt.8.xml, only full-upgrade is mentioned but apt accepts both. In doc/apt-get.8.xml, full-upgrade is not listed as an alias but is mentioned under the update option where dist-upgrade is not. Both man pages should list both commands as alternate terms, and all references to the command in the synopsis and other sections should only use the preferred term. Ideally, both documents would prefer the same term, for consistency, but at least each should be self-consistent. Regards, Roy.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julian Andres Klode <jak@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-13 12:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <IOQ25-2DcL-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1200740 |
On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 11:48:09AM GMT, Roy Orbitson wrote: > Package: apt > Version: 2.7.14build2 > Severity: minor > > Dear Maintainer, > > The man pages do not make it clear that the full-upgrade and > dist-upgrade commands are aliases that perform the same operation. > > In doc/apt.8.xml, only full-upgrade is mentioned but apt accepts both. Well yes that is intentional, dist-upgrade is a misleading name, so the more user-friendly apt(8) tool has it renamed to full-upgrade, but of course we keep muscle memory compatibility modes. We support various other typo/muscle memory aliases that aren't necessarily documented. > > In doc/apt-get.8.xml, full-upgrade is not listed as an alias but is > mentioned under the update option where dist-upgrade is not. That's weird but stuff happens. > > Both man pages should list both commands as alternate terms, and all > references to the command in the synopsis and other sections should only > use the preferred term. Ideally, both documents would prefer the same > term, for consistency, but at least each should be self-consistent. I must say I don't care much about these nitpicks. The manual pages are in total disarray and need to be rewritten from scratch, with one per subcommand, they're not useful in their current shape. -- debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev ubuntu core developer i speak de, en
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roy Orbitson <roy-orbitson@devo.net.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-06-14 05:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <IP5DP-2Nqb-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1200770 |
On 13/6/24 20:08, Julian Andres Klode wrote: > Well yes that is intentional, dist-upgrade is a misleading name, so > the more user-friendly apt(8) tool has it renamed to full-upgrade, > but of course we keep muscle memory compatibility modes. There is no suggestion to change the commands, themselves, only to pick a consistent approach in the documentation. > We support various other typo/muscle memory aliases that aren't > necessarily documented. Perhaps they also should be. >> Both man pages should list both commands as alternate terms, and >> all references to the command in the synopsis and other sections >> should only use the preferred term. Ideally, both documents would >> prefer the same term, for consistency, but at least each should be >> self-consistent. > > I must say I don't care much about these nitpicks. If it were nitpicking, there wouldn't be as many questions on the Internet like <https://askubuntu.com/q/770135>. Users don't know whether there's a difference, and the man page won't tell them. > The manual pages are in total disarray and need to be rewritten from > scratch, with one per subcommand, they're not useful in their current > shape. That seems a tad dramatic. They *are* useful and people are still taught that man pages are the first thing they should consult.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.bugs.dist
csiph-web