apt-get vs. aptitude
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 17:05:45 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> Don't use apt-get if you intend to obtain helpful error messages.
>
>> . . .
>
>> The following packages have unmet dependencies:
>> iceweasel: Depends: xulrunner-1.9.1 but it is not going to be
>> installed
>> E: Broken packages
>
> Please run "aptitude -s install iceweasel" and see what solutions and
> diagnostics, if any, aptitude offers.
>
> Sven
>
> ¹ To be clear: this rant is not against you, but is meant for the apt
> developers who apparently cannot be bothered to explain *why* a
> package "is not going to be installed".
Thanks Sven.
That's very insightful. Right at time I was wondering if it is time to
get rid of aptitude and use back the apt-get. Previously, I believed that,
,-----
| All of the old reasons to use aptitude instead of apt-get for
| command-line package installation no longer apply; those
| improvements have been rolled back into apt-get.
`-----
Thanks
--
Tong (remove underscore(s) to reply)
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/techdocs/
http://xpt.sourceforge.net/tools/
Reply to: