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
4) I am actually low on disk space and want to get rid of some
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