Bug#931559: release-notes: inaccurately claims 'apt upgrade' doesn't install new packages

[Andrei POPESCU]

Package: release-notes
Severity: normal

Hello,

Filling this as a bug in case the fix should be deferred until later
(e.g. to give translators a chance to catch-up).

Probably due to a s/apt-get/apt/ the minimal upgrade section claims
'apt upgrade' doesn't install new packages.

While this shouldn't create any problems in practice, it might still
surprise some users, so it should be fixed (eventually). Attached a
minimal patch addressing this.

Slightly more intrusive: move the mention about new libraries from
'apt full-upgrade' a few paragraphs further down. I can come up with a
patch if desired.

Alternatively the command could also be switched back to 'apt-get' in
order to get the minimal upgrade to be as minimal as possible ;)

Kind regards,
Andrei

[Justin B Rye]

Post by Andrei POPESCU
Probably due to a s/apt-get/apt/ the minimal upgrade section claims
'apt upgrade' doesn't install new packages.
While this shouldn't create any problems in practice, it might still
surprise some users, so it should be fixed (eventually). Attached a
minimal patch addressing this.

Oh, that's annoying.

Post by Andrei POPESCU
Slightly more intrusive: move the mention about new libraries from
'apt full-upgrade' a few paragraphs further down. I can come up with a
patch if desired.
Alternatively the command could also be switched back to 'apt-get' in
order to get the minimal upgrade to be as minimal as possible ;)

Well, wasn't that was the point of having a "minimal" stage in the
first place? So probably if we're going to keep that section it
should do what it says it does. And until and unless apt develops a
flag to make it behave the old way, that seems to mean we should go
back to prescribing "apt-get upgrade".

I was also wondering how likely it is that "apt full-upgrade" will
leave things held back and need to be helped out by aptitude (as
mentioned at the end of 4.4.5). But I ran out of un-upgraded systems
to do test-runs on.

[Andrei POPESCU]

Post by Justin B Rye

Post by Andrei POPESCU
Alternatively the command could also be switched back to 'apt-get' in
order to get the minimal upgrade to be as minimal as possible ;)

Well, wasn't that was the point of having a "minimal" stage in the
first place? So probably if we're going to keep that section it
should do what it says it does. And until and unless apt develops a
flag to make it behave the old way, that seems to mean we should go
back to prescribing "apt-get upgrade".

How about a footnote mentioning that 'apt' could be used as well, but it
won't be so 'minimal' anymore?

Kind regards,
Andrei

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Tue, 9 Jul 2019 21:46:15 +0200
with message-id <42ee74c5-8891-b37f-91a4-***@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#931637: Slight inaccuracy in explanation of "apt upgrade"
has caused the Debian Bug report #931637,
regarding release-notes: inaccurately claims 'apt upgrade' doesn't install new packages
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 ***@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Tue, 9 Jul 2019 21:46:15 +0200
with message-id <42ee74c5-8891-b37f-91a4-***@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#931637: Slight inaccuracy in explanation of "apt upgrade"
has caused the Debian Bug report #931637,
regarding Slight inaccuracy in explanation of "apt upgrade"
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 ***@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)