Aptitude or Apt-get?

[CJ Master]

When you're using a distro with the option, which one do you use? :)

[tech13]

Does it matter really? I have used both and got the same results.

[days_of_ruin]

apt-get.Because its what I know and I don't see any reason to use aptitude.

[Thirtysixway]

Does it matter really? I have used both and got the same results.

I don't think you're supposed to mix the two. They each can handle packages a little differently, causing issues.

[inobe]

i stick with synaptic/ apt

[BGFG]

I recently had to resort to deborphan to find and remove unused/orphaned packages on my system and subsequently found out that all dependancies installed with a package using aptitude are removed upon uninstallation with aptitude.

So from now on, Aptitude.

[wolfen69]

I don't think you're supposed to mix the two. They each can handle packages a little differently, causing issues.

as long as you do

sudo aptitude update
first, you will be fine. then you can aptitude install.

[Kvark]

I recently had to resort to deborphan to find and remove unused/orphaned packages on my system and subsequently found out that all dependancies installed with a package using aptitude are removed upon uninstallation with aptitude.

So from now on, Aptitude.
Doesn't...


sudo apt-get autoremove

...remove all orphaned packages?

[lykwydchykyn]

aptitude all the way. I wish people would use it when giving advice, it really has much better conflict handling, incorporates a number of seperate older tools like apt-cache, and has a nice ncurses interface for when you really need to get down to business.

I guess for just quick installs & upgrades it doesn't matter, but for situations where you're going to be managing from the CLI (server installs, e.g.) it's a much more capable solution.

I switched to it when I noticed that the Debian team was calling it the recommended package manager.

[TBOL3]

I would use aptitude. But I think the Add/Remove Applications App in the Applications menu, uses apt.

[mamamia88]

i usually use aptitude doesn't it remove unnescessary packages when installing?

[BGFG]

Doesn't...


sudo apt-get autoremove

...remove all orphaned packages?

Nope. I frequently run that command and still found around 30 unused packages with deborphan. Subsequently tested aptitude by installing packagekit (with all it's dependancies) and removing, and aptitude removed everything.

I suggest you try deborphan on your system and see for yourself.

[days_of_ruin]

I would use aptitude. But I think the Add/Remove Applications App in the Applications menu, uses apt.

It does and so does synaptic.So I think its safer to use apt-get if you are also going to be using synaptic and gnome-app-install (The actual program name for Add/Remove).

[lykwydchykyn]

It does and so does synaptic.So I think its safer to use apt-get if you are also going to be using synaptic and gnome-app-install (The actual program name for Add/Remove).

aptitude, apt-get, synaptic, and add/remove are all front-ends for the APT system, which is libapt-pkg. What is unsafe about using more than one? I've been mixing Synaptic and aptitude for years.

[munishvit]

Using aptitude over apt-get are largely irrelevant if you're using Edgy Eft (6.10), Feisty Fawn (7.04), or any latest version of Ubuntu.
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/aptitude
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/index.php

[lisati]

Although I voted aptitude, it can depend on what I'm doing. One advantage of the aptitude approach is that it can pull in dependencies that you've forgotten, which can save you some typing.

[konqueror7]

i use apt-get because its much shorter to type...:D

[x33a]

i use apt-get because its much shorter to type...:D

1 character shorter :P

i mostly use aptitude, sometimes apt-get especially while following some tutorial.

[sisco311]

i use apt-get because its much shorter to type...:D


1 character shorter :P

i mostly use aptitude, sometimes apt-get especially while following some tutorial.

nope, that is ain't true. apt-get is 1 character longer.


apt-g<TAB> #6


apti<TAB> #5

[samjh]

I haven't experienced any practical differences between the two in Debian. In Ubuntu, I use apt-get, because aptitude tends to want to automatically remove packages that I actually want to keep.

[billgoldberg]

I recently had to resort to deborphan to find and remove unused/orphaned packages on my system and subsequently found out that all dependancies installed with a package using aptitude are removed upon uninstallation with aptitude.

So from now on, Aptitude.

use apt-get autoremove instead of apt-get remove.

[konqueror7]

nope, that is ain't true. apt-get is 1 character longer.


apt-g<TAB> #6


apti<TAB> #5

nope, its 1 letter shorter...;)

[missbliss]

I just use apt-get b/c it was the firs thing I came across, hence being the first thing I got used to.

[tombom62]

apt-get
;cause Im used to it;)

[CJ Master]

Yea, but apt-get seems to fail a lot for me, which is why I love how aptitude can "problem solve."

[tombom62]

I haven;t ever had an apt-get problem.

[run1206]

same here, i've never had a problem with apt-get either :?
i use both but i voted apt-get cuz it's what i'm used to using.

[CJ Master]

You've never had a problem where you try to use apt-get and there were dependancies that couldn't be deleted, so it won't let you?

Aptitude is very nice for situations like those.

[bobmatino17]

apt-get, its what my dad taught me to use and thats really all ive ever used on debian based machines.

[dragos240]

apt-get has super cow powers, aptitude doesn't, simple as that.

[run1206]

You've never had a problem where you try to use apt-get and there were dependencies that couldn't be deleted, so it won't let you?

Aptitude is very nice for situations like those.

nope, never had that problem. whenever i did sudo apt-get autoremove, all the dependencies got deleted :?

[unutbu]

I can't say for sure, but I wonder if your problems with apt-get come from using both apt-get and aptitude on the same system.

If you stick to one or the other exclusively, I think you improve your chances of never running into any problems.

[Citizen Bleys]

*thread necromancy*

Can anybody actually explain what the difference is? Aside from apt-get moo, I mean.

[BGFG]

*thread necromancy*

Can anybody actually explain what the difference is? Aside from apt-get moo, I mean.

Aptitude is a wee bit better at handling dependancies.

Eg. sudo aptitude install 'whatever' installs a package and all it's dependancies, if there is a problem, aptitude will attempt to resolve it intelligently. Sudo aptitude remove 'whatever' removes the package and all the extra packages that were installed with it in one fell swoop. No need to 'autoremove' as in apt-get. Aptitude will also automatically 'autoremove' everytime it is run, as long as orphaned packages exist.

not really that major eh? i use them both anyway. Just remember that for which ever one you intend to use, run apt-get or aptitude update before.

[ninja_numbnuts]

Which do you use?

[Chemical Imbalance]

Aptitude.
It automatically removes unused dependencies when uninstalling a package and it has a CLI package manager.

[OutOfReach]

apt-get: force of habit

[Dharmachakra]

Aptitude. It's more similar to pacman.

[HappyFeet]

Aptitude.
It automatically removes unused dependencies when uninstalling a package and it has a CLI package manager.

Taking 2 seconds to do

sudo apt-get clean && sudo apt-get autoremove
is no big deal. Besides, apt-get is less things to type. ;) But whatever floats your boat. My computer works perfect either way, which is all that counts.

[hayden92]

apt-get

Not out of preference, it just that I've never looked into aptitude

[BslBryan]

apt-get: Force of habit
+1

[CJ Master]

Did you search first? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1096473)

Anyway, now I use pacman. ;) But aptitude otherwise.

[Dark Aspect]

What is the difference? I have used both before when following howtos but I didn't really even notice the two where different.

[Slug71]

smart

[kerry_s]

aptitude is the first thing i remove from my install.
it has screwed up enough times i don't even want it there.

[keplerspeed]

Aptitude. I was advised to use it when I first started using ubuntu, as it is:

a wee bit better at handling dependancies

[anystupidname]

apt-get has super cow powers, aptitude doesn't, simple as that.

Sure, but aptitude has snakes n' elephants n' stuff...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Aptitude_moo.png

:D

[Chemical Imbalance]

aptitude is the first thing i remove from my install.
it has screwed up enough times i don't even want it there.

How do you mean?

Are you talking about dpkg locks?

[The Toxic Mite]

I use apt-get for packages, and aptitude for software.

:P

[BlazeFire247]

Apt-get:

I'm used to it
I don't remember using aptitude
It's one of the commands I remember next to "sudo" :lol:

[Firestem4]

generally i only use a graphical manager when I want to browser around and see whats there. Its much easier to do with a GUI Interface than text.

When I know something I want to install any other time, and its quicker to do apt-cache show/search, i will just use the terminal.

[CJ Master]

generally i only use a graphical manager when I want to browser around and see whats there. Its much easier to do with a GUI Interface than text.

When I know something I want to install any other time, and its quicker to do apt-cache show/search, i will just use the terminal.

What about when there's some package where you know the package name? Such as apt-get firefox?

[gnomeuser]

I've used debian in the past but I honestly never felt at home with apt-get or dpkg as a whole. When I need to use a cli interface I strongly prefer yum, it's command design feels very elegant and it's output is a thing of beauty.

When it comes to every day tasks, I prefer PackageKit's GNOME applications, I tend to prefer using a gui for things like applying updates, installing new software and so on.

[sim-value]

emerge ! :P

Na i use apt-get aptitude i just know that ppl claim that it washed their dishes and worked better with meta-packages ...

[clonne4crw]

apt-get is shorter to type

[monsterstack]

I used Linux for about a year before I discovered the following application.


sudo aptitude

Go ahead, try it. You'll be surprised.

[Chemical Imbalance]

I used Linux for about a year before I discovered the following application.


sudo aptitude

Go ahead, try it. You'll be surprised.

It is indeed handy at the console.

[kk0sse54]

apt-get, although it's been a while since I've used it since I'm not too big of a fan of Debian package management as a whole.

[gregh7470]

When you're using a distro with the option, which one do you use? :)
I use aptitude and here is why:
apt-get will install dependencies just like aptitude but when you remove these packages with apt-get, it won't remove the libraries this package installed even though they are no longer needed... aptitude keeps a log of its actions in /var/log/aptitude and removes everything.
When you install that package with aptitude and remove it with aptitude, aptitude 'detects' that those library packages aren't used anymore and will therefore automatically remove them.
Some commands you can try:


aptitude update
aptitude upgrade
aptitude dist-upgrade
man aptitudeI would strongly recommend sticking with just one package manager since they don't keep track of one another - if you use synaptic for awhile then switch to apt-get then aptitude your asking for trouble, even a broken OS.
Whenever I do a fresh install...because I experiment a lot...I start with
aptitude updateEven when used in terminal mode it's 'click-able'...you can click the menus and make choices. I know synaptic is easier but if you get used to aptitude you want regret it.

[forrestcupp]

I use aptitude and here is why:
apt-get will install dependencies just like aptitude but when you remove these packages with apt-get, it won't remove the libraries this package installed even though they are no longer needed...

That's what apt-get autoremove is for.

Before they added autoremove, aptitude was the preferred method. Now, there's really no reason for aptitude, especially when there are good GUI frontends for apt-get and not for aptitude.

It's not wise to mix the two.

[philcamlin]

apt-get :popcorn:

[ad_267]

Is there a way to search package descriptions using aptitude?

"apt-cache search package_name" searches names and descriptions, but the -n option searches only in the package name. "aptitude search" just searches the package names.

I voted apt-get.

[raymondh]

apt-get

[bryonak]

Is there a way to search package descriptions using aptitude?

"apt-cache search package_name" searches names and descriptions, but the -n option searches only in the package name. "aptitude search" just searches the package names.

I voted apt-get.

As opposed to apt-*, description search is off by default... to turn it on, prefix with a ~d:

aptitude search ~dTEXT

I prefer aptitude because it's
a) faster to write: apit[tab] is one char less than apt-g[tab] and two chars less than apt-ca[tab]
b) unified. I can do "aptitude search" aswell as "aptitude install" aswell as "aptitude markauto", while I have to use three different programs with apt-*.
c) offering an additinal UI which is far easier to navigate than apt-* when handling broken dependencies.

The main reason I see in favour of apt-* is the lazyness to switch ;)
Which is understandable, because there is nothing wrong with the old apt-* tools, so most people don't bother to use something else.

[adssse]

apt-get into it

[Gizenshya]

apt-get