linux@networkingnewsletter.org.uk wrote:
So, is the consensus to stick with 'apt'? Or at least to choose one and stick with that and not to mix apt and aptitude (it sounds to me as though Marc is saying if you mix you'll end up with 2 out of date lists of what has/hasn't been inst-ed)
I say choose one and stick with it. Personally that is aptitude. Once I learned about it I never went back to apt-get. The main issue, it seems, is that aptitude by default installs a lower level than apt-get does. This is largely a non-issue because one can change the default if one doesn't like it and aptitude also, by default, marks anything it installs on its own as Automatically installed and if nothing depends (or suggests, or recommends) it then it is removed. IE, it might throw in a bit more but it certainly is far superior in cleaning up after itself.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature