Hi, i wrote: > > What kind of programming language can have inspired the developers > > to define such a syntax ?
Max Nikulin: > https://blog.jak-linux.org/2019/08/15/apt-patterns/ This points to aptitude. The package description of aptitude says "mutt-like syntax for matching packages". Indeed https://www.sendmail.org/~ca/email/mutt/manual-4.html has in its second half some lines which resemble apt-patterns. > As to obsolete vs. local packages, my guess is that apt may label some > version as obsolete if another version of the same package is still > available from some repository. Otherwise it is local. To me it seems that apt-patterns simply calls "obsolete" what apt-list then marks in its output as "[... local]". Obviously these terms refer to different reasons why a package is not found in the official repos. But these reasons seem to be indistinguishable. So in the end both terms depict the same status. Have a nice day :) Thomas
