apt-get vs. aptitude

[T o n g <mlist4suntong@yahoo.com>]

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/