Re: apt-get vs. aptitude
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 12:10 PM, msl09 <contamsl09@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 2:45 AM, Dmitrii Kashin <freehck@freehck.ru> wrote:
>> Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you filed a bug report about aptitude breaking apt (whatever
>>>>> that means!) or is this just FUD?
>>>>
>>>> No, I have not. Because it is normal aptitude's behaviour.
>>>>
>>>> It was a cognitive case...
>>>
>>> You start out by replying that this isn't a bug but normal for
>>> aptitude!
>>
>> Yes, it's normal for aptitude, but isn't it ugliness?
>>>
>>> And I agree.
>>>
>>> Aptitude gives you the option to to install a piece of software
>>> without a hard dependency (and then dealing with the consequences) or
>>> of overriding a previous choice of software installation.
>>>
>>> It gives you a choice! It doesn't install packages that breaks your
>>> installation or conflicts with your requirements without your consent!
>>
>> Great. It gives me a choice to break my system, and the only thing that
>> separates me from it is the letter 'y'. Thanks. I do not like this
>> choice. I would prefer not to have it.
>>>
>>> Not only is aptitude not broken but it doesn't break apt since you can
>>> still use apt-get/aptitude to install other packages.
>>
>> Did you read carefully. or your aim is to start a new holywar?
>
> Oh I have fond memories of aptitude breaking my system. Once it
> suggested me to remove most of my system, including apt, I thought it
> was going to upgrade it so I confirmed it. I had to reinstall apt from
> the debian packages website.
>
> In this new installation I gave it another try but when it started
> suggesting very weird plans (like remove all gnome packages) I happily
> went back to apt and never looked back.
Please don't top-post.
If aptitude's such a destructive package, why is it still in the repositories?
I suspect that the problem's in the examples above are simply PEBKAC.
Reply to: