In <[🔎] email@example.com>, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: >On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:24 AM, Celejar <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 17:13:22 -0800 >> John Jason Jordan <email@example.com> wrote: >>> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:21:34 -0600 >>> firstname.lastname@example.org dijo: >>> >For several years, I have enjoyed apt-get as a very powerful >>> >software install tool that doesn't require a mouse, but I have been >>> >finding it increasingly problematic over the past year or so. I am >>> >beginning to suspect that apt-get is becoming aged and neglected. >>> >Is there a newer/more modern package tool that has been getting >>> >more development attention that I should be using instead? I wouldn't say that the apt suite is being neglected. If you have some specific issues, I think we can explain them. If there are bugs, I think the apt team would certainly fix them. That said, the interactive resolver for aptitude probably won't be rolled into apt-get and it may be the best way to deal with complex dependency issues. >>> But all the people in the know about Debian tell me I should be using >>> aptitude. >> >> "Note that aptitude is the preferred program for package management >> from console both for package installations and package or system >> upgrades." > >I cannot figure out how to do that with aptitude: > >$ apt-get source cmake AFAIK, not possible with aptitude. (If I'm wrong, this is the Internet, so I expect to be corrected quickly.) This is not a use case for which I've ever seen aptitude suggested, and not even "hardcore" aptitude users would call for the removal of apt-get, or any of the rest of the apt suite. While I haven't used apt-get in quite a while, I still make extensive use of apt-cache and some use of apt-key. My opinion is that aptitude is a better package manager, but that is possibly limited to *binary* packages. The (vast) majority of packages users deal with are binary packages anyway. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. email@example.com ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.