Re: should we recommend apt-get or aptitude?
The though that recommended Debian way is to use aptitude.
http://wiki.debian.org/SystemPrinting/Discussion
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2007/08/msg00000.html
Lucas
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
http://lucasmanual.com/mywiki/TurboGears2
Bazaar and Launchpad
http://lucasmanual.com/mywiki/bzr
Reply to: