stupid dependency on aptitude

[T <mlist4suntong@yahoo.com>]

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 11:45:49 -0400, Gregory Seidman wrote:

> } > That's your problem.  aptitude sucks.
> } 
> } I always use something like  "aptitude install -t version xxx". Aptitude
> } remembers reverse dependencies, hence aptitude purge xxx will remove xxx
> } and all it's deps, apt-get won't.
> 
> This is the primary benefit I keep hearing about for aptitude over
> apt-get. I just don't see it as particularly valuable. Let's talk use
> cases:
> 
> 1) ...

> 4) I am actually low on disk space and want to get rid of some
> unused
>    packages to free some space. First off, disk space is cheap so this
>    is moderately unlikely to begin with. Second, apt-get clean is the
>    first step. Finally, I can use deborphan (or gtkorphan if I'm in a
>    GUI frame of mind) to get rid of unneeded or unused packages.
> 
> That fourth use case is the only one that involves more effort when
> using apt-get instead of aptitude. It's also an uncommon case,
> especially as compared to the others. I don't consider it worth giving
> up the simplicity of apt-get to optimize an uncommon use case. (How
> uncommon is it? I think I've gone through it once in the past six years,
> and that was on a machine with a 2GB HD.)

I totally agree. apt-get is sufficient. 

If you worry about the unneeded packages, then use deborphan. I use it
every time I install or un-install packages. no hassle at all.

I never use aptitude, never need to and never want to. However, for all
the apt-get lovers, we are fighting a loosing battle here. Some stupid
packges (eg. tasksel) insist the dependency on aptitude. aptitude has to
be in your system. I wish that could be changed, so I can have a clean
Debian system. 

thanks