should we recommend apt-get or aptitude? - Debian

This is a discussion on should we recommend apt-get or aptitude? - Debian ; Hi, the release-notes writing needs a decision about this question. This is what somme DD's think about it: On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 14:17:30 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote (Bug#489132): >On Tue, 07 Oct 2008, W. Martin Borgert wrote: >> Can't ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: should we recommend apt-get or aptitude?

  1. should we recommend apt-get or aptitude?

    Hi,

    the release-notes writing needs a decision about this question.

    This is what somme DD's think about it:

    On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 14:17:30 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote (Bug#489132):
    >On Tue, 07 Oct 2008, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
    >> Can't we recommend use of apt-get? It seems to work. (Never
    >> tried aptitude, though.)

    > We can but it doesn't look serious if we recommend something else
    > for each release, I'd rather like that we stick to one front-end
    > and make it good. We're far from that unfortunately, the apt* packages
    > need some serious help as already pointed out by others.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 18:53:12 +0200, Luk Claes wrote (Bug#489132):
    >On Tue, 07 Oct 2008, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
    >> Can't we recommend use of apt-get? It seems to work. (Never
    >> tried aptitude, though.)

    > I guess many new users are used to synaptic or aptitude. Personaly I
    > think we can recommend to use apt-get, but should test upgrades with
    > aptitude and synaptic too and solve/describe possible issues with them.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On 06/11/08 00:33, Steve Langasek wrote (Bug#503296):
    >On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 11:37:56PM +0100, Giovanni Rapagnani wrote:
    >> Some bug reports have already reported apt-get works better than
    >> aptitude. But it seems that it won't look serious to recommend the use of
    >> a different package management front-end for each release. And as
    >> aptitude was recommended in the 2 previous release, the ideas would be
    >> (see bug #489132) :
    >> - 1/ to stick at aptitude, find the possible issues and document these
    >> issues in the release notes;
    >> - 2/ improve aptitude.

    >
    > The reasons for prefering aptitude over apt-get no longer apply, and
    > aptitude in etch and later is a *worse* tool than it was in earlier
    > releases, because the maintainer has made the upgrade algorithm overly
    > clever to the point where it will now propose upgrade solutions that
    > directly conflict with what has been specified on the command line.
    >
    > We should cut our losses and recommend apt-get again for upgrades from etch,
    > as apt is being maintained in a fashion much more appropriate for a core
    > piece of Debian infrastructure.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    --
    Giovanni


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  2. Re: should we recommend apt-get or aptitude?

    Quoting Giovanni Rapagnani :
    > the release-notes writing needs a decision about this question.
    >
    > This is what somme DD's think about it:

    ....

    I more or less never used aptitude in my life and don't remember
    severe problems with it. Given that apt-get now supports the most
    interesting features of aptitude as well, I would go for apt-get.
    So far, nobody came up with an issue, where apt-get behaved worse
    than aptitude for the etch-to-lenny upgrade. In both cases we
    should recommend upgrading the tool itself first anyway.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

+ Reply to Thread