Re: --> APT's New Version <--
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Thank you for the in depth answer! That was exactly what I'm looking
for. Good to know that the automatically-installed info is shared
between all of them.
Cheers,
Bastian
On 08.04.2014 12:19, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 09:27:06AM +0200, Bastian Venthur wrote:
>> If I remember correctly aptitude and apt-get do not use the same
>> data base for keeping track of packages which where only
>> installed to fulfill dependencies of other packages. Is this
>> still true in general and specifically with apt?
>
> Let me clarify: aptitude implemented tracking of
> "automatically-installed" vs. "manually-installed" packages first.
> The feature got later backported by its author to libapt-pkg, which
> both, aptitude and apt, use. ("apt" includes in this context also
> frontends like synaptics).
>
>
> The question is when this was the case:
>
> apt (0.6.44.2exp1) experimental; urgency=low […] * added support
> for aptitude like auto-install tracking (a HUGE HUGE thanks to
> Daniel Burrows who made this possible) […] -- Michael Vogt
> <mvo@debian.org> Mon, 3 Jul 2006 21:50:31 +0200
>
>
> aka: If you don't happen to run oldoldoldoldstable (Debian 3.1
> "sarge") this isn't true, regardless of how often it is said in
> discussions about "aptitude vs apt" – probably by people who
> weren't around at the time it was true (like myself).
>
>
> In reality aptitude, apt, synaptics, … share not only states, but
> also quiet a bit of code in libapt-pkg and you can mix and match
> using them as much as you might want to (which btw is also the
> reason why you can laugh about anyone who claims to have removed
> 'apt' in favor of 'aptitude' from the system).
>
> That said, there really is some state which isn't shared: aptitude
> has its own packages-on-hold state and might ignore holds set by
> others (via dpkg) at times, but that is a long-standing bug #137771
> in it.
>
> The general case is that everything is shared and if not it is a
> bug, so your Lackmus test can be: If someone says something about
> apt, but doesn't reference changelogs/bugreports, it is probably
> outdated and/or downright wrong (applies to all projects older than
> a few years though).
>
>
> Best regards
>
> David Kalnischkies
>
- --
Bastian Venthur http://venthur.de
Debian Developer venthur at debian org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1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=+vhi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: