[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: should we recommend apt-get or aptitude?

The though that recommended Debian way is to use aptitude.


On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:58 PM,  <hendrik@topoi.pooq.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:23:52PM +0100, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On 06/11/08 17:09, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
>> >severe problems with it. Given that apt-get now supports the most
>> >interesting features of aptitude as well, I would go for apt-get.
>> >So far, nobody came up with an issue, where apt-get behaved worse
>> >than aptitude for the etch-to-lenny upgrade. In both cases we
>> >should recommend upgrading the tool itself first anyway.
>> I have experienced some upgrade to lenny where apt behaved better than
>> aptitude.
>> Do we agree to replace aptitude by apt-get in the release-notes? If so, I
>> will do the necessary for submitting a patch for that.
> One question I haven't seen addressed in this thread (perhaps I haven't
> looked hard enough) is what impact the use of apt instead of aptitude
> has on systems that are currently using aptitude.  Will upgrading with
> apt mean that aptitude will no longer know which packages were expressly
> requested by the user, and which were installed merely because other
> packages needed them?  Or has apt-get now progressed to maintain this
> information?
> -- hendrik
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Turbogears2 Manual
Bazaar and Launchpad

Reply to: