On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 02:28:08PM -0500, Jason Clinton wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 September 2005 2:16 pm, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > That's why "we" don't like aptitude. It too aggressively removes
> > things.
>
> Would the almighty Debian Gods decide which fraking package manager 'we' are
> supposed to use? I have seem countless times on this list that apt-get is
> deprecated, synaptic is no good, and aptitude is the only one that can before
> 'dist-upgrade' correctly.
I have no idea how that discussion was held, not being a DD, but it
certainly wasn't held out in the open.
Regarding package managers... apt-get isn't a package manager, has never
been billed as a package manager, and only started acquiring
package-manager-like features (Recommends, anyone?) after cluebies started
whining about how they were breaking their boxen with it.
Opinion... the decision was probably made to support aptitude as the
'dist-upgrade' tool (as in upgrade from distribution to distribution, not
as in the sense of dist-upgrade the way the apt-get man page describes)
because it blindly installs Recommended packages by default.
Oh, and if synaptic is "no good", then Ubuntu has a serious problem, no?
--
Marc Wilson | Many a man that can't direct you to a corner
msw@cox.net | drugstore will get a respectful hearing when age
| has further impaired his mind. -- Finley Peter Dunne
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature