[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Maze of Twisty Turny Little Package Managers

On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 11:50:25AM -0500, Ralph Katz wrote:
> On 11/29/2006 08:50 PM, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> [BTW, this should be an FAQ:  Package managers - what's the difference
> between apt, aptitude, dpkg, dselect, synaptic... ?]
> > Yes :-)  Try them all by yourself and decide for yourself.  Each tool
> > has merits.  Question is not "which is better" but "which one suits
> > you".
> In a earlier post to this list, I wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: aptitude dist-upgrade removes important packages
> Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 09:31:19 -0500
> From: Ralph Katz <ralph.katz@rcn.com>
> To: debian-user <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
> References: <20061117182026.GA523@cromwell.tmiaf>
> On 11/17/2006 01:30 PM, Russell L. Harris wrote:
> >
> > Meanwhile, Debian installs "synaptic" by default.  Use synaptic
> > instead of aptitude.
> >
> > RLH
> Au contraire...  The docs are quite explicit about this: use *aptitude*.

This caught me to read recent release notes.

> http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/i386/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html
> 4.4 Upgrading packages
> The recommended way to upgrade from previous Debian GNU/Linux releases
> is to use the package management tool aptitude. This program makes safer
> decisions about package installations than running apt-get directly.

This assertion to aptitude happened for sarge release note. (fron CVS)

> 4.4.2 Upgrading aptitude
> Upgrade tests have shown that etch's version of aptitude is better at
> solving the complex dependencies during an upgrade than either apt-get
> or sarge's aptitude. It should therefore be upgraded first [...]

This was new to sarge release note too. (from CVS)

Interesting.  But many of the command line use example for aptitude are
too simplistic rewrite of apt-cache command, I presume.  Especially,

It is usually better to do these from full screen console mode, for me.


Reply to: