there is a reason: > > * Joshua Goodall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040717 04:40]: > > Unlike all the other implementations I've seen so far, it doesn't > > replace the existing APT package; it just adds a new method.
as Joshua explained, the program is _not a replacement_ for apt, but _a method_ apt. so, having a method for apt without having apt doesnt make much sense, does it ? best regards, philpp ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 2:25 PM Subject: [mailinglists] Re: new tool - apt-method-https > * Joshua Goodall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [040717 04:40]: > > I've developed a simple HTTPS method for APT using Perl's LWP libraries. > > Unlike all the other implementations I've seen so far, it doesn't > > replace the existing APT package; it just adds a new method. Support > > for client certificates is included. Please try it and give feedback! > > > > More info, including lines for sources.list(5), at > > http://www.roughtrade.net/linux/ > > Is there a reason the package depends on apt? > > Hochachtungsvoll, > Bernhard R. Link > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
