Re: Apt vs apt-get [Was: Apt-get Upgrade Problem in Stretch?]
From: deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Agreed. I was beginning to despair of this list while reading through
this thread. But we seem to live in times when evidence matters less
and less, and assertion more and more.
Sorry about the politics. Anyway, AFAICT according to the Release
Notes, apt-get is preferred over aptitude for the upgrade from
jessie to stretch (where this is relevant); according to the
Installation Manual, apt is the tool of choice, though no preference
is expressed over apt-get which is not mentioned.
Does it matter what we all think, even if agree or it matters what
the manual of the package says. In my installation this is manual
I found, it says apt all over the place, meanwhile there is apt-get
package to install. /usr/share/man/man8/apt-get.8.gz
In my repositories the only mention of apt-get is in cron-apt
and its dependency says apt. Its description says:
automatic update of packages using apt-get
There is also apt-utils, dep apt, apt-get not mentioned
Aptitude is recommended by apt.
If a script in /usr/bin said apt-get = apt would you still use it?
Or I could call it pacman or yogurt or apt-get-from-2-decades-ago
Nevertheless, the data showed there can be some difference
still between the one and the other, in rare occassions like 2
different sid installations of similar packages and similar amd64
machines. How 'bout them apples?
Reply to: