Aptitude vs Apt-Get

[aysiu]

As I demonstrate here (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=945406&postcount=7), aptitude is preferable to apt-get if you install and then uninstall a lot of applications.

There are a lot of threads about apt-get v. aptitude, and almost all of them come to that same conclusion:
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=162114
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=131922
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=117394
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=91535
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=66995
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=37736

Now, my first question: is there a downside to aptitude (as opposed to apt-get)? If so, what is it?

Second question: if there is no downside, why does almost every Ubuntu guide out there ask users to apt-get stuff instead of aptitude installing/removing stuff?

[helpme]

Now, my first question: is there a downside to aptitude (as opposed to apt-get)? If so, what is it?

I think the downsides are pretty clear.
1. The graphical frontends are frontends to apt, not aptitude, so if you manage your software from the command line and via synaptic and gnome-app-install you'll end up with a mixed environment, which is a mess.

2. I never really tried aptitude, so correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand it's claim to fame is that it also gets rid of all the dependencies when you uninstall an application. Now this is of course great, however I'm not entirely sure if this isn't problematic when it comes to meta-packages. For example, if you want to get rid off something that ubuntu-desktop depends so this will lead to ubuntu-desktop being uninstalled. Now, couldn't there be the problem that when ubuntu-desktop and dependencies get uninstalled you'll get rid of a lot more software than you actually wanted to?

[aysiu]

I think the downsides are pretty clear.
1. The graphical frontends are frontends to apt, not aptitude, so if you manage your software from the command line and via synaptic and gnome-app-install you'll end up with a mixed environment, which is a mess. I don't see how it's a mess. I use Synaptic, apt-get, and aptitude, and I've never run into any problems.



2. I never really tried aptitude, so correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand it's claim to fame is that it also gets rid of all the dependencies when you uninstall an application. Now this is of course great, however I'm not entirely sure if this isn't problematic when it comes to meta-packages. For example, if you want to get rid off something that ubuntu-desktop depends so this will lead to ubuntu-desktop being uninstalled. Now, couldn't there be the problem that when ubuntu-desktop and dependencies get uninstalled you'll get rid of a lot more software than you actually wanted to? I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think that's the case. For example, in the link I posted above, here's an excerpt:
user@ubuntu:~$ sudo aptitude remove kword
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading extended state information
Initializing package states... Done
Building tag database... Done
The following packages are unused and will be REMOVED:
kspread libwv2-1c2
The following packages will be REMOVED:
kword
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 3 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 19.6MB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] y
Writing extended state information... Done
(Reading database ... 80478 files and directories currently installed.)
Removing kword ...
Removing kspread ...
Removing libwv2-1c2 ...
user@ubuntu:~$ It's removing those dependencies because they're "unused." So my guess is that if they were... used... they would stay, but I haven't tested that theory yet.

[htinn]

Second question: if there is no downside, why does almost every Ubuntu guide out there ask users to apt-get stuff instead of aptitude installing/removing stuff?

I think more people are familiar with apt-get, so it naturally gets used more. That being the case, if you value consistency there's no question which tool should be in your documentation.

[helpme]

I don't see how it's a mess. I use Synaptic, apt-get, and aptitude, and I've never run into any problems.

Well, maybe mess is to hard a word, but if for example you install somethings with apt and then some with aptitude, wouldn't it mean that stuff installed with apt would not be managed by aptitude? For exmaple, you install program a using apt, which needs library x, then get rid of program a, which leaves library x on your computer. Now you install program b with aptitude, which also requires library x. After that you decide you don't need program b after all and remove it with aptitude. Contrary to what you might expect, wouldn't library x still be on your machine?



I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think that's the case. For example, in the link I posted above, here's an excerpt:
user@ubuntu:~$ sudo aptitude remove kword
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Reading extended state information
Initializing package states... Done
Building tag database... Done
The following packages are unused and will be REMOVED:
kspread libwv2-1c2
The following packages will be REMOVED:
kword
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 3 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 19.6MB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] y
Writing extended state information... Done
(Reading database ... 80478 files and directories currently installed.)
Removing kword ...
Removing kspread ...
Removing libwv2-1c2 ...
user@ubuntu:~$ It's removing those dependencies because they're "unused." So my guess is that if they were... used... they would stay, but I haven't tested that theory yet.
I think this is a problem for meta-packages, not for normal packages, as meta-packages don't only rely on libraries, but on the high level apps themselves.
For example, let's say ubuntu-desktop relies on the gimp. Now if you install ubuntu-desktop with aptitude and then uninstall something with aptitude that also gets rid of ubuntu-desktop, wouldn't that also mean that gimp will be uninstalled, or am I simply wrong here?

[5-HT]

...

Good question.
As htinn mentioned, maybe because Aptitude just isn't as well known?
I don't think there are any downsides to Aptitude, at least none that I've encountered.
I use it pretty much exclusively instead of Synaptic/Apt.


Well, maybe mess is to hard a word, but if for example you install somethings with apt and then some with aptitude, wouldn't it mean that stuff installed with apt would not be managed by aptitude? For exmaple, you install program a using apt, which needs library x, then get rid of program a, which leaves library x on your computer. Now you install program b with aptitude, which also requires library x. After that you decide you don't need program b after all and remove it with aptitude. Contrary to what you might expect, wouldn't library x still be on your machine?
Yes, it would be still there (but it would not mess anything up).

Basically, if you want to take advantage of Aptitude's automatic dependency handling when removing packages, you'll need to have (well...no, there is a way around this) installed said package with Aptitude (or else how would it know?).

However, you can, at any time, mark packages as 'automatically installed'.
When this flag is set, any packages that are marked in that manner will be uninstalled when they are no longer depended upon by any other package.
This is exactly what Aptitude does itself when installing packages.


General tip: If you want to use Aptitude, it's easiest to just install and uninstall using aptitude.


For example, let's say ubuntu-desktop relies on the gimp. Now if you install ubuntu-desktop with aptitude and then uninstall something with aptitude that also gets rid of ubuntu-desktop, wouldn't that also mean that gimp will be uninstalled, or am I simply wrong here?

Yup, you are right.
If you want to get around this, just mark the packages you want to keep (or all) depended upon by the metapackage as 'manually installed'.

[transactionlogfiller]

I ran into difficulties when I installed gaim2 beta because I tried removing the old gaim and it told me xubuntu-desktop was broken, and offered to fix it every time I installed/updated anything else. If I try and remove xubuntu-desktop it wants to remove lots of other things that I use all the time, so I'm not convinced it can tell which packages are unused effectively.

That said, I do prefer to use aptitude over apt-get. I never use synaptic so I'm not too worried about the mess.

[aysiu]

I guess I have a lot of the same questions as helpme does--I'm not myself that well-versed in aptitude, and that's why I asked if there are any known (not suspected) downsides.

Well, I think I may just keep recommending apt-get for general things (until I've had more time to play around with aptitude) but still recommend aptitude for metapackages and also to people who really like a "clean" system but also like to install and uninstall a lot of stuff.

[John.Michael.Kane]

aysiu you might be on to something with this. could a user get the same results installing deborphan, and configuring an "Orphan" filter under synaptic.

[aysiu]

aysiu you might be on to something with this. could a user get the same results installing deborphan, and configuring an "Orphan" filter under synaptic. I don't know.

[engla]

Another piece of the puzzle requested -- the history?

Which is older aptitude, or apt-get? And why do they overlap so much if they weren't conceived at the same time?

[Mustard]

I'm pretty pleased with aptitude myself, but I can't see any consistent way to promote its use amongst new users without creating confusion.

It's like trying to advise people to use checkinstall when compiling from source. The majority of the HOW TO's give the generic methods, while a particularly useful command gets overlooked at a stage when people are probably needing it the most (after installing stuff they never really wanted or knew what it did).

*bing* *light bulb goes on*

Well, we could have an 'Advanced Installation Guide' of some kind, that covers both aptitude, checkinstall, and common methods of searching for dependencies when compiling from source ie apt-cache show, apt-cache search, aptitude show, aptitude search. :)

[Hoffmann]

As I demonstrate here (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=945406&postcount=7), aptitude is preferable to apt-get if you install and then uninstall a lot of applications.

There are a lot of threads about apt-get v. aptitude, and almost all of them come to that same conclusion:
...
Now, my first question: is there a downside to aptitude (as opposed to apt-get)? If so, what is it?

Second question: if there is no downside, why does almost every Ubuntu guide out there ask users to apt-get stuff instead of aptitude installing/removing stuff?

In order to updgrate Ubuntu, for example from Ubuntu 5.10 (Breezy Badger) to Ubuntu 6.06 (Dapper Drake), which alternative is the best: apt-get or aptitude?

Hoffmann

[aysiu]

In order to updgrate Ubuntu, for example from Ubuntu 5.10 (Breezy Badger) to Ubuntu 6.06 (Dapper Drake), which alternative is the best: apt-get or aptitude?

Hoffmann I don't think it matters. You're not going to sudo aptitude remove ubuntu-desktop and then somehow restore your computer to Breezy from Dapper.

[Hoffmann]

I don't think it matters. You're not going to sudo aptitude remove ubuntu-desktop and then somehow restore your computer to Breezy from Dapper.

I got you.

Thanks,
Hoffmann

[gingermark]

I remember looking for a front-end (like synaptic) for aptitude - and of course it is aptitude itself, but it's console based.

But if aptitude can do everything that apt can, and add functionality, hopefully eventually a Synaptic-like frontend will emerge (pardon the pun - would be funnier if we were using Gentoo) for it.

[Zyphrexi]

Mustard:
Well, we could have an 'Advanced Installation Guide' of some kind, that covers both aptitude, checkinstall, and common methods of searching for dependencies when compiling from source ie apt-cache show, apt-cache search, aptitude show, aptitude search.

that would be fantastic, on a side note, that kind of stuff should go into a ubuntu doc package or something. I know about the starter guide and all, but there are simply so many priceless guides the community has made, it really seems a shame not to add them as a package. I mean the wealth of info is so huge, that could help new users understand the differences between aptitude and apt. I remember trying aptitude once... It was terrible, I completely (nearly) destroyed ubuntu. Since then I've simply been too afraid to try it again.

[Hoffmann]

Mustard:

that would be fantastic, on a side note, that kind of stuff should go into a ubuntu doc package or something. I know about the starter guide and all, but there are simply so many priceless guides the community has made, it really seems a shame not to add them as a package. I mean the wealth of info is so huge, that could help new users understand the differences between aptitude and apt. I remember trying aptitude once... It was terrible, I completely (nearly) destroyed ubuntu. Since then I've simply been too afraid to try it again.

Zyphrexi:

Could you explain more your bad experience with aptitude? That explanation would be very useful, I guess.

Hoffmann

[Zyphrexi]

well it was back when I first started with ubuntu, and ubuntu was my first debian experience, so mainly the interface was confusing, and to tell the truth I think I might have put in debian repositories. From someone unfamiliar with debian, using aptitude is a big jump. Sorry I can't go into detail, memory is a bit foggy. A nice howto might help with the aptitude scariness factor.

[claydoh]

Just try running aptitude with no arguments (as a cli alternative to synaptic) and try figuring it out:

sudo aptitude
That is probably another reason.

[Mustard]

I tend to get into more trouble with the interface, than I do when I simply use it as a command line alternative to apt-get. When I use the aptitude interface I can work out how to select a package to install, but I have no idea how to 'unselect' a package that I have mistakenly marked for install. It seems to remember them as well.

[user1397]

This thread is for sharing your experiences with the two methods of installing with the terminal, apt-get and aptitude.

Personally, i've used apt-get far more, since most of the wiki and ubuntuforums.org instructions are written with apt-get, not aptitude.

I've only really used aptitude for installing the kubuntu-desktopand the xubuntu-desktop packages. I wanted to uninstall them later, so I just did a simple
sudo aptitude update && sudo aptitude remove kubuntu-desktop [or xubuntu desktop] and that removed all the packages that were part of those desktop packages. So, uninstalling stuff with aptitude (well at least big things) is easier than with apt-get.

I have noticed though, that when I try to install something with aptitude, for example k3b, it also tries to remove "unused packages". It called the gstreamer-0.8-mad package "unused", and it wanted remove it, even though it had to have been used because i do listen to music! So that kind of bugged me.

[gsdefender]

As an addicted Debian sid user, I find apt-get scriptability very powerful. Just my 5 cents.

[G Morgan]

I use apt-get because generally I know all the packages I want to install. I tend to only use aptitude if I've got no X server access.

[bruce89]

I always use aptitude, since I don't want a whole load of unused libraries all over the place.

[sharkboy]

aptitude can be used from the command line too, and is in my experience more intelligent than apt-get when it comes to resolving complex dependencies. For instance, aptitude is recommended by debian when upgrading from woody to sarge, and as a debian sid user, I very rarely have encounter troubles at all after I started doing aptitude dist-upgrade instead of apt-get dist-upgrade every day.

[5-HT]

+1 for aptitude.

Aptitude is very flexible and is great at managing packages thanks to automatic/manual install flags.
I do a server install from the CD, and use aptitude for everything else after that.

For those who feel like checking it out, there is a great walkthrough explaining _all_ of Aptitude's features. The guide can be found in /usr/share/aptitude/README, or by entering 'aptitude' at a prompt, and go to the 'help' menu).

There is one default setting that I always change before using Aptitude: by default, it treats recommended packages as dependencies.
If someone is planning on installing a large metapackage (e.g. ubuntu-desktop), treating recommends as dependencies results in _many_ more packages being installed (though they may be handy/wanted) than would be otherwise.

The procedure for changing the default 'treat recommends as dependencies' is documented in the help guide (can be done in Aptitude's config file, or via the pseudo-GUI).

[basketcase]

I used aptitude for the first time the other day in command line when apt-get did not install what I was looking for.

Other than that, it has always been apt-get and I love it!

[pianoboy3333]

It seems though, that smartpm may be taking over, if it copies characteristics like keeping track of unused libs and such, but with a command and gui interface, it could possibly rock the house. http://labix.org/smart

[Jucato]

I'm trying to get used to the whole aptitude business, because I think it handles packages and dependencies more intelligently than apt-get. However, I think I have to edit aptitude's config so that it won't treat recommended packages as dependencies (thanks for the info 5-HT).

As for smartpm, I'm going to keep a close eye on that one. It seems to be the ultimate package manager front-end. But I'm not entirely sure if it handles metapackages/dependencies the same way or better than aptitude. Also, even their own FAQ admits that it is quite resource intensive.

(Shameless plug: Some of my own thoughts about the different package managers, their pros and cons: http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=190985)

[5-HT]

I'm trying to get used to the whole aptitude business, because I think it handles packages and dependencies more intelligently than apt-get. However, I think I have to edit aptitude's config so that it won't treat recommended packages as dependencies (thanks for the info 5-HT).
To do that, you could add
aptitude::Recommends-Important "false"; to either:
i) ~/.aptitude/config (will be sourced if using sudo)
ii) /etc/apt/apt.conf (the user's config will take precedence over this one)

Or just fire up aptitude and click the relevant option under Options -> Dependency handling.


Shameless plug: Some of my own thoughts about the different package managers, their pros and cons: http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=190985)
Thanks for the review!

[user1397]

To do that, you could add
aptitude::Recommends-Important "false"; to either:
i) ~/.aptitude/config (will be sourced if using sudo)
ii) /etc/apt/apt.conf (the user's config will take precedence over this one)

Or just fire up aptitude and click the relevant option under Options -> Dependency handling.do you think this will fix that annoying problem of mine, where it wants to remove "unused packages" when trying to install or uninstall something with aptitude?

[5-HT]

do you think this will fix that annoying problem of mine, where it wants to remove "unused packages" when trying to install or uninstall something with aptitude?
No, that option will not prevent Aptitude from removing unused packages.

However, there is an option in Aptitude to have it not remove unused packages automatically.
When that option is set, Aptitude *basically* becomes apt-get in terms of functionality.

The easiest way to configure Aptitude to not automatically remove unused packges is to fire it up in text-based-GUI mode
sudo aptitude
Options -> Dependency Handling -> uncheck "Remove unused packages automatically"

You can also configure the option in Aptitude's config file(s).
The relevent syntax can be found in /usr/share/aptitude/README.

If you don't want to completely disable Aptitude's unused dependency handling - which is a big part of what makes the program so great - a different option would be to mark the packages you want to be always kept - unless you manually remove them - as 'manually installed'.

Hope that helps

[aysiu]

Basically, I think you should use whatever suits you.

If you don't want the package manager removing unused packages automatically, just use apt-get. That doesn't mean you have to use apt-get all the time--just when you don't want smart dependency handling.

If you install a package with the possibility that you might later on want to remove the package and its accompanying dependencies, it's always a good idea to install it with aptitude, just in case.

[user1397]

Basically, I think you should use whatever suits you.

If you don't want the package manager removing unused packages automatically, just use apt-get. That doesn't mean you have to use apt-get all the time--just when you don't want smart dependency handling.

If you install a package with the possibility that you might later on want to remove the package and its accompanying dependencies, it's always a good idea to install it with aptitude, just in case.Good way to summarize this thread, aysiu.

[aysiu]

I've written up a little spiel about aptitude, for easy reference:
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/aptitude

[rai4shu2]

This kind of begs the question: why remove anything?

If I use a library for one application, then decide I don't like that particular application, what is the likelihood that I will nevertheless want to use another application that also uses that library? I would say that the chances are pretty good.

[aysiu]

Well, for some people, it's a hard drive space issue, especially if you have a drive or partition that's 6 GB or less.

For others, it's a weird compulsion to just have their systems "clean."

For certain packages, it's not just a matter of a few libraries--metapackages like kubuntu-desktop, for example. If someone decides, "Ew. I hate KDE. I just don't want any of that on my system any more,"
sudo apt-get remove kubuntu-desktop will do essentially nothing.

[rai4shu2]

I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the idea of removing an entire desktop worth of packages.

In any case, the issue of space limitations is getting to be less and less important with hard drives getting cheaper all the time.

[aysiu]

If you're not comfortable removing an entire desktop, don't remove it.

What you're talking about has nothing to do with apt-get versus aptitude. As you originally stated:
why remove anything?

Well, you, apparently, shouldn't remove anything. But others have their reasons.

I happen to have a 160 GB hard drive, but there are users with only 6 GB or less.

I don't mind having three desktop environments installed, but there are other users who prefer to have only one installed.

And something that hasn't been mentioned--for those who dist-upgrade to Edgy, why waste the bandwidth and download time to upgrade a whole bunch of programs you don't use?

Again, you can speak for yourself personally, and you may never remove programs, but others have their own reasons for wanting to uninstall programs.

[rai4shu2]

I really don't see what dist-upgrade has to do with apt-get vs aptitude.

[aysiu]

I really don't see what dist-upgrade has to do with apt-get vs aptitude.
It doesn't, but then neither does your question about why remove anything?

If you don't ever want to remove any packages ever, then it doesn't really matter how you install them.

All I'm saying is that just because you, rai4shu2, never remove packages, it doesn't mean other users will never remove packages. There are plenty of people who have small hard drives, have obsessive-compulsive disorder about lingering packages, or just hate certain desktop environments after trying them and want them removed.

dist-upgrade has to do with your original question. If I install and try 50 programs I no longer use and no longer want to use, that's 50 more programs a dist-upgrade will redownload and install in addition to the regular upgrade packages. Why waste the bandwidth and time to download and install the newer versions of those 50 programs you don't use?

Well, that's what happens if you never remove them.

[nalmeth]

Aysiu, it's funny, because you have gone ahead and made the awesome Pure-Gnome / Pure-KDE guides.

So incase someone has erroneously installed kubuntu with apt-get, and don't like it, at least they will have that to fall back on.

Personally, I've taken the habit of trying to complicate users as little as possible. If a person wants to install kubuntu, or any other similar metapackage, and I'm the first to respond, I will recommend aptitude. But if the person has already used apt-get, via someone elses suggestion, or just wants to install a simple media player, I'll try to stick with what they've learned, and help them sort out the issue with commands they are already acquainted with.

The last thing we want (and which does often happen) is for 6 people to recommend 6 different ways to do one simple thing. The confusion is overwhelming for a new person. As they explore they will find there are advantages from more advanced commands like aptitude and checkinstall.

[aysiu]

Those pure Gnome and pure KDE guides aren't flawless. One user here, for example, used one of those guides and found it had uninstalled Apache, MySQLServer, PHP and a few other things, and when she or he reinstalled those things, they weren't working properly.

If you install with aptitude, only the dependencies that aren't being used by other programs will be uninstalled. If you use my pure-Gnome and pure-KDE guides, anything that isn't the vanilla ubuntu-desktop or kubuntu-desktop might get taken out.

[nalmeth]

Really. . .
Just one person had this happen? Breezy or Dapper?
Did they track down what caused those packages to be removed, and further broken?

I don't use any of the LAMP stuff, but no one likes breakage.

Got a link for that?

[aysiu]

Here's a link for it (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=1157477&postcount=40). Maybe you can help the person out.

[rai4shu2]

Okay, well I'm starting to see your point. But can we really make a tool standard that doesn't have Super Cow Powers? ;)

[aysiu]

Okay, well I'm starting to see your point. But can we really make a tool standard that doesn't have Super Cow Powers? ;)
I think maybe we can.

[bruce89]

aptitude is a lot better, I have used ever since I found about it. I hope that SMART will be a graphical way of the same thing that aptitude does.

Okay, well I'm starting to see your point. But can we really make a tool standard that doesn't have Super Cow Powers? ;)
Aptitude has easter eggs, try the following: (one line at a time)

aptitude moo
aptitude -v moo
aptitude -vv moo
aptitude -vvv moo
aptitude -vvvv moo
aptitude -vvvvv moo
aptitude -vvvvvv moo

[camelgrass]

What is the difference between aptitude and apt-get in the command-line for installing packages? Which one should I use?

Thanking you, Marty

[tribaal]

I highly suggest that you use aptitude, as it handles dependencies much better when *removing* packages.

Ubuntu still includes apt-get and people usually refer to it because it's the first and oldest common ancestor for package management in debian-based systems.

So you can safely change apt-get for aptitude in command lines people post around this forum.

- trib'

[camelgrass]

I was wondering about that. In most docs and forums I have only seen apt-get refered to, but then in some places people recommend using aptitude.

It's a wonder aptitude isn't refered to more?

Thanks for clearing that up anyway mate.

[Perfect Storm]

Old habits from older user which new users takes to them.

Usually when I want to install a single or two libs/applications I use apt-get, but when I want to installing something that requires alot of diffrent libs I use aptitude.

[tribaal]

I use aptitude all the time.
They are really equivalent, except aptitude does the removal better. So why not use aptitude in all cases, just in case you then someday need to remove something? :)

- trib'

[Perfect Storm]

Never been a problem in my case. So I use what's easy to write ;)

[daniel of sarnia]

Question, why is apt-get still in ubuntu when aptitude is so much better. Do you think it could be left out in the future?

[az]

Question, why is apt-get still in ubuntu when aptitude is so much better. Do you think it could be left out in the future?

1- Lots of people have been using apt-get for years and have not had problems.

2- Lots of things are a frontend to APT (synaptic, Add-Remove programs, Adept, Linspire's click'n'run, etc...). Not a lot of things are a frontend to aptitude, AFAIK.

3- Matt Zimmerman is the maintainer of the libapt package for Debian. He is also the chief technical officer for Ubuntu.

There have been a lot of things that are being worked on for Edgy, look at the specs for Edgy in launchpad. I beleive that the ones that involve package management (Things like binary diffs for packages, so you don't haveto download the whole package to get the updates, etc...) probably involve improving APT?

[morequarky]

"easier to write"

Make an alias for aptitude that is short and quick and use the alias. :) no more "difficult writing"

[Perfect Storm]

I know. But I still prefer apt-get, nothing wrong with aptitude. It's just what I'm used too. :KS

[camelgrass]

Problem is it causes confusion for newbie's like me ;).

[aysiu]

Problem is it causes confusion for newbie's like me ;).
That's why education is a good thing:
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/aptitude

I think it mainly has to do with old habit.

[az]

Problem is it causes confusion for newbie's like me ;).

The Doc Team have styleguides which help this. Any documentation that is styleguide-compliant will not mention any specific package manager, but just say "use any method to install the following packages" and provide a link to the package management documentation pages.

The user gets to pick and not think that the reson their application is not working is because it was not installed with one package manager or the other (which makes no difference).

[andb]

What are the relative advantages and disadvantages of using apt-get versus aptitude? aptitude seems to be the unanimous winner to me, especially the removal of no-longer-needed packages... Im suprised anyone gives advice with apt-get. Is it just because aptitude is missing the super-cow powers?

[ashrack]

am also interested in this.
And why doesnt synaptic work more similar to APTITUDE when removing packages? So that it also removes packages not needed anymore

[someguyouknow]

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/installingsoftware

[kwalo]

I use both aptitude and apt-get.
apt-get for upgradeing and aptitude for installing/removeing packages. I really like aptitude's removeal of dependencies. However aptitude has one more feature: when one package has Recommends field, aptitude will install packages from that field, as it does with depends field. If you don't want to install recommended packages, use --without-recommends option, like this:

sudo aptitude install --without-recommends pakckage

[anaconda]

apt-get is used and recommended mostly by older linux users, who haven't gotten to know aptitude yet, or they just recommend it because it comes "automatically"

Old habits die slowly.

[elettronicha]

aptitude is newer and more powerful, deals better with dependencies, removes unneeded deps, is more configurable, has nice logs in /var/log/aptitude, has a semi-graphical GUI. Also Debian users seggest it.

[ashrack]

so how come SYNAPTIC isnt using APTITUDE as its back end?

[kewldude606]

If we are writing something for the wiki, should we use apt-get or aptitude in the code segments?

Example:
To start, you must install dependancies with:
sudo apt-get install frankenstein

or

To start, blah blah:
sudo aptitude install frankenstein

[Bloodfen Razormaw]

Aptitude is the recommended tool for installing packages, and has been since it was introduced. It provides more features than apt-get, is more consistent, and has a nice interface.

[aysiu]

I believe aptitude should be recommended except in rare cases where it wants to "hold back" packages unnecessarily.

It handles the removal of dependencies better. More details here:
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/aptitude

I do believe, though, that--for it to function properly--you have to update first:
sudo aptitude update
sudo aptitude install frankenstein

[buckethead27]

Which is better? Aptitude or apt-get? When you say what you choose, please explain your reason.

[taurus]

I am going to move this to Cafe and by the way, aptitude and there is no reason. It just IS... [-(

[tribaal]

Aptitude of course, because it resolves removal dependencies.

- trib'

[Titus A Duxass]

Silly question, silly poll.
Aptitude.

[pattymnaish]

Aptitude of course, because it resolves removal dependencies.

I agree completely.

[Iarwain ben-adar]

I agree completely.

+1


Iarwain

[peak_performance]

How come there are two different commands if/when one is "better"? And if aptitude is better, how come it seems as is everyone uses apt-get? :) I've wondered about this one for a while.

[buckethead27]

How come there are two different commands if/when one is "better"? And if aptitude is better, how come it seems as is everyone uses apt-get? :) I've wondered about this one for a while.

Agreed. That was my next question :)

[Anonii]

aptitude. But I'm using apt-get, because I'm lame, a bad example, and bored to wait the extra 4~ seconds that aptitude takes in the start.

[Buffalo Soldier]

apt-get. It's autoremove function seems to be working nicely in removing orphan packages in Edgy. I'm sure it will get better in ubuntu 7.04 :)

[HW_Hack]

I'm pretty liberal -- been around the block a few times - but I have no idea what you're voting on .... I think its shameful:mrgreen:

[argie]

apt-get, just because I'm used to it.

[Spif]

I'm using apt-get because I never really found out what the difference is. When you install applications with Synaptic, do you use apt-get or aptitude?

[xyz]

I vote aptitude.
Among other things, installing and therefore removing using aptitude is considered 'better' because it removes all the dependencies that were needed!

[el_itur]

I'm using apt-get because I never really found out what the difference is. When you install applications with Synaptic, do you use apt-get or aptitude?

I belive it would be only apt since apt-get, aptitude and synaptic ar just diferent front-end's for the same apt api.

For the poll, I don't use any of thos, I'm GUI-dependent.

[OffHand]

It depends... sometimes aptitude is too radical.

[skymt]

aptitude, because I prefer the interactive interface to Synaptic.

[Ramses de Norre]

Absolutely aptitude, I don't like all the unused dependencies apt-get leaves on my system.
With aptitude you can add and remove software and be sure that nothing is left (this is when using purge).

Also: aptitude is better with dependencies in general.

[KhaaL]

aptitude, for the interface and how it handles dependencies

[kuja]

apt-get, because aptitude tries to be too smart.

[aysiu]

aptitude in general for reasons explained here:
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/aptitude

apt-get for some specific cases where aptitude tries to act too smart.

[chaosgeisterchen]

I solely use aptitude because it handles dependencies way better, if I for instance install a solitary application with GNOME-dependencies (while using KDE) I also get rid of the whole GNOME desktop upon removing this package.

apt-get would leave behind a lot of orphaned packages.

[Christmas]

I like apt-get better and use it only.

[katgfan]

Well i use only apt-get and thats it.

[zek725]

Quoting the advantages of aptitude regarding dependencies, what happens if I install with apt-get then uninstall with aptitude? Will aptitude still perform the same?

[chaosgeisterchen]

A mixture in usage may result in a dependency hell and broken package database. It's highly recommended not to use them both, use either or.

[Nonno Bassotto]

In abstract aptitude is better, but I voted for apt-get since it has a decent graphical frontend (synaptic). I prefer to lose a little more time to care about libraries when I uninstall something, but have a graphical tool. Of course aptitude witha decent gui would be the best.

By the way, what about Smart?

[EdThaSlayer]

Aptitude is better. Better handling with the packages.

[frodon]

I'm neither an apt-get nor an aptitude expert so i can't really say which one is better and especially based on what ?

As for unremoved dependencies i don't care, my ubuntu partition is 20Go and i have 450Go for datas, so leaving several Mo of unremoved dependencies is not a problem for me.
In general i would prefer apt-get because the synaptic interface just rocks, it's intuitive and really easy to use.

[chaosgeisterchen]

As far as I know orphaned packages can slower your system.

@Synaptic: Does it really base on apt-get? I always thought it was based on dpkg itself.

[aysiu]

As far as I know orphaned packages can slower your system. I've never seen evidence of this.

Can you link to some documentation on this... or some benchmarks?

[chaosgeisterchen]

It's only subjective experience. I do not know what I do wrong but my system becomes awfully slow after installing a number of extra packages.

[shining]

It's only subjective experience. I do not know what I do wrong but my system becomes awfully slow after installing a number of extra packages.

Even if many of these packages are services that are automatically run, they would be mostly sleeping if you don't use them, so they wouldn't take any cpu cycle. Only some memory would be used, but there shouldn't be a big difference.
If they aren't, there shouldn't be any differences afaik, except of course some disk space used.

[jeffrey.mezic]

Hi All,

(FYI I'm still a noob at installing packages.)

Question: I use Synaptic Package Manager almost exclusively. From what I can tell, its the GUI front-end of apt-get. But what is this Aptitude? Does it have a GUI front end?

I feel like I'm only interested in the GUI because all of the options available to me are presented at the same time. I can search via categories, type in a search for packages, scroll through a list of packages, and read their descriptions, etc.

How would one find a list of packages available in the repositories using apt-get (via the command line) or aptitude? If a link is available that has all this information, I would be grateful. I've read http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/aptitude but it didn't quite answer my question about a GUI front end for aptitude.

[aysiu]

The GUI frontend for aptitude isn't pretty or fully point-and-click. If you want to see it, just type
aptitude in the terminal.

[BLTicklemonster]

Aptitude, dude. Because it rhymes.

And it asks questions that help you install stuff. At least it did when I installed my nvidia driver from tseliot. When I was using apt-get, it just dorked out and said there were unresolved dependencies, but when I used aptitude, it asked me if I wanted to actually work around the problem. I have the best nvidia drivers now.


... but then, apt-get does have super cow powers...



This APT has Super Cow Powers.

[xyz]

The GUI frontend for aptitude isn't pretty or fully point-and-click. If you want to see it, just type
aptitude in the terminal.
Hi...glad to cross PATHs with you here...gives me an opportunity to say how much I learned (am learning) from your ...cats!!
It never occured to me to type "aptitude" in a terminal...so is it like opening 'sort of' Synaptic and going Orphaned+Delete or Residual+Delete_whatever?

[aysiu]

Glad you found the Psychocats Ubuntu site helpful.

I'm not sure I know what you're asking, though, regarding Orphaned+Delete and Residual+Delete...

[xyz]

Sorry I wasn't clear about this.
In Synaptic, I can create a filter which I'll name "Orphaned" or any other name. Clicking on "Orphaned" will show a list of stuff I can delete.
When I click on "Status" and, I think it's called, "Residual conf", I can also remove what I find in there.

Now typing "aptitude" in a terminal, a window opens.
How do I handle it? Same as explained above where I can delete/remove unnecessary stuff?

I hope I was able to make myself a bit clearer.
Thanks.

[chaosgeisterchen]

Never got to get any use out of the aptitude 'GUI'. Therefore I do not use it.

[aysiu]

Sorry I wasn't clear about this.
In Synaptic, I can create a filter which I'll name "Orphaned" or any other name. Clicking on "Orphaned" will show a list of stuff I can delete.
When I click on "Status" and, I think it's called, "Residual conf", I can also remove what I find in there.

Now typing "aptitude" in a terminal, a window opens.
How do I handle it? Same as explained above where I can delete/remove unnecessary stuff?

I hope I was able to make myself a bit clearer.
Thanks.
As far as I know, there's no filter or view of orphaned packages in aptitude, but if you're using aptitude, there's also no need for such a view as there won't be any orphaned packages.

That's why people use aptitude because it removes unused dependencies when removing applications.

If you still have lingering orphans, you can use gtkorphan or deborphan to isolate those.

[zek725]

As far as I know, there's no filter or view of orphaned packages in aptitude, but if you're using aptitude, there's also no need for such a view as there won't be any orphaned packages.

That's why people use aptitude because it removes unused dependencies when removing applications.

If you still have lingering orphans, you can use gtkorphan or deborphan to isolate those.

I don't know why (probably due to installation using apt-get) but I see 1 broken in aptitude. how do i correct that?

[aysiu]

Have you tried this?
sudo aptitude -f install If that tries to be too smart, which it does sometimes, you can try this.
sudo apt-get -f install

[BrokeBody]

It's a matter of choice. They are both good. :)

[pichalsi]

well i use apt-get, i dont rly know how to use the aptitude "gui" and am 100% ok with apt-get.

[bionnaki]

I use apt-get because aptitude can be a pain to type sometimes. I dont care about purging dependencies.

[jonesyp]

Aptitude, becuase it makes things so easy! No missing depenencies!

[araz]

Aptitude of course, because it resolves removal dependencies.

- trib'

I agree completely.

[Freddy]

apt-get, cause I can't spell aptitude :-). /// Freddan

[aysiu]

apt-get, cause I can't spell aptitude :-). /// Freddan
That's the best reason I've heard yet!

[skymt]

I use apt-get because aptitude can be a pain to type sometimes. I dont care about purging dependencies.

I have it aliased:
alias apt="sudo aptitude"
alias apti="apt install"
alias aptr="apt remove"

[Freddy]

That's the best reason I've heard yet!
Well I cant help it, it's just so damn hard.

[angrykeyboarder]

cuz Aptitude is a newer application. And in Linux we like to have 43 ways to accomplish a task. :-)

[karamba_kid]

This thread has made me want to switch to aptitude becuase disk space is important for me right now because I'm running low in /home. If I marked all my packages as installed with the "automatic" flag in aptitude (I already have a simple script) and then went on and continued to use aptitude updates and package managment would I run in to many problems?

[shining]

This thread has made me want to switch to aptitude becuase disk space is important for me right now because I'm running low in /home.

Is your /home a separate partition?
In this case, using aptitude, which might remove some unneeded dependencies, won't have any effect to the space used in /home, only in /

[karamba_kid]

Is your /home a separate partition?
In this case, using aptitude, which might remove some unneeded dependencies, won't have any effect to the space used in /home, only in /
It sure is. When I installed I decided to use LVM.


alex@trillville:~$ df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/vg1-root 7.9G 370M 7.2G 5% /
varrun 252M 144K 252M 1% /var/run
varlock 252M 0 252M 0% /var/lock
udev 252M 144K 252M 1% /dev
devshm 252M 0 252M 0% /dev/shm
lrm 252M 19M 234M 8% /lib/modules/2.6.15-27-386/volatile
/dev/hda1 177M 21M 147M 13% /boot
/dev/mapper/vg1-home 75G 56G 16G 79% /home
/dev/mapper/vg2-backup
73G 43G 27G 62% /media/hdb1
/dev/mapper/vg1-tmp 1.9G 36M 1.8G 2% /tmp
/dev/mapper/vg1-usr 22G 2.7G 18G 13% /usr
/dev/mapper/vg1-var 3.0G 741M 2.1G 26% /var

[glotz]

It depends... sometimes aptitude is too radical.

apt-get, because aptitude tries to be too smart.

apt-get for some specific cases where aptitude tries to act too smart.
Please do elaborate.

[aysiu]

Please do elaborate.
Here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1761017#post1761017)'s an example.

[ciscosurfer]

apt-get. It's autoremove function seems to be working nicely in removing orphan packages in Edgy. I'm sure it will get better in ubuntu 7.04 :)You can deborphan/gtkorphan for that.

And my vote is for Aptitude -- it's really just a better front-end. Of course, sometimes, apt-get is my preferred app as it doesn't pull in every extra recommended package(s) that I may or may not need.

:-)

[glotz]

Here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1761017#post1761017)'s an example.
Interesting but I have to say I don't have a clue why would it have liked to uninstall those packages. I think this is relevant to this thread.

[aysiu]

Interesting but I have to say I don't have a clue why would it have liked to uninstall those packages. I think this is relevant to this thread.
It's trying to be smart about what packages to keep and which to remove.

Sometimes, as I said before, it tries to be a little too smart.

So for those situations, I'd use apt-get instead.

[glotz]

So it's basically random? Or do we know why?

[ciscosurfer]

Here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1761017#post1761017)'s an example.Thanks for the nod, btw. :D

[FyreBrand]

Here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1761017#post1761017)'s an example.
Thanks for that example. Several times I have had this problem. I never knew that Synaptic/Adept could mess with aptitude. The worst time this happened was on a dist-upgrade from Dapper. Since I had a lot of customization and I used adept with aptitude there was a lot of breakage.

If I understand properly mixing everyday use of apt-get and aptitude can cause dependency confusion between the two.

Does this also apply to the graphical front ends like adept and synaptic? Mostly I've used aptitude but occasionally I've used adept or synaptic. Would people say this is generally a bad practice?

[moore.bryan]

aptitude in general for reasons explained here:
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/aptitude

apt-get for some specific cases where aptitude tries to act too smart.
i second this sentiment. sometimes, aptitude is too smart for its own good.

[angrykeyboarder]

You can deborphan/gtkorphan for that.

I've had problems with deborphan. It often wants to remove "orphaned" packages that aren't orphaned at all.

[shining]

Thanks for that example. Several times I have had this problem. I never knew that Synaptic/Adept could mess with aptitude. The worst time this happened was on a dist-upgrade from Dapper. Since I had a lot of customization and I used adept with aptitude there was a lot of breakage.

If I understand properly mixing everyday use of apt-get and aptitude can cause dependency confusion between the two.

Does this also apply to the graphical front ends like adept and synaptic? Mostly I've used aptitude but occasionally I've used adept or synaptic. Would people say this is generally a bad practice?

I also had this problem several times with aptitude, so I would also like to know more about it. I think it's indeed when mixing apt-get and aptitude usage, and I don't think there is the same problem with synaptic, but I'm really not sure. Maybe a bug should be reported.

[namah]

I find apt much easier to use

[aysiu]

I find apt much easier to use
Can you explain what you mean by that? Give a few examples?

[deanlinkous]

less letters to type :)
apt-get

[aysiu]

less letters to type :)
apt-get
I don't find that easier, actually.

tq@zk%r is also fewer letters than aptitude, but aptitude is easier for me to type because it's a real English word and has no punctuation in it.

[shining]

less letters to type :)
apt-get

Actually no, apt-get is one more letter :)
apt-g<tab>
apti<tab>

[mips]

Actually no, apt-get is one more letter :)
apt-g<tab>
apti<tab>

Very true ;)

[deanlinkous]

OUCH!
cause I am old school and apt was what I am use to!

Okay, I make a promise to start using aptitiude from now on!

Anyone use wajig or gdebi very much?

[shining]

Can you explain what you mean by that? Give a few examples?

I'm not sure what namah meant, but I originally thought aptitude only has its ncurses interface, and not a cli one also.
And I don't find aptitude ncurses interface very intuitive, compared to ncmpc or rtorrent for example, which I appreciate a lot.
So I found it easier to just type apt-cache search foo and apt-get install foo, or apt-get update/upgrade.
I only find out recently you could type the same with aptitude, so well, there is no difference :)

[namah]

I'm not sure what namah meant, but I originally thought aptitude only has its ncurses interface, and not a cli one also.
And I don't find aptitude ncurses interface very intuitive, compared to ncmpc or rtorrent for example, which I appreciate a lot.
So I found it easier to just type apt-cache search foo and apt-get install foo, or apt-get update/upgrade.
I only find out recently you could type the same with aptitude, so well, there is no difference :)

Well yes, I guess I forgot about the cli option with aptitude. When I tried it I to was turned off by the ncurses interface and in the long run I'm just used to apt-get and prefer it out of habit.

[aysiu]

I recently found out about apt-get autoremove packagename, and I have to say that makes me a fan of apt-get now, especially because of those weird situations where aptitude tries to be too smart (for some mysterious reason).

[glotz]

Couldn't find that on the man page?

[aysiu]

Couldn't find that on the man page?
Actually, no. Please let me know if you find it.
APT-GET(8) APT-GET(8)



NAME
apt-get - APT package handling utility -- command-line interface

SYNOPSIS
apt-get [-hvs] [-o=config string] [-c=file] {update | upgrade |
dselect-upgrade | install pkg... | remove pkg... |
source pkg... | build-dep pkg... | check | clean | autoclean}


DESCRIPTION
apt-get is the command-line tool for handling packages, and may be con�
sidered the user’s "back-end" to other tools using the APT library.
Several "front-end" interfaces exist, such as dselect(8), aptitude,
synaptic, gnome-apt and wajig.


Unless the -h, or --help option is given, one of the commands below
must be present.


update update is used to resynchronize the package index files from
their sources. The indexes of available packages are fetched
from the location(s) specified in /etc/apt/sources.list. For ex�
ample, when using a Debian archive, this command retrieves and
scans the Packages.gz files, so that information about new and
updated packages is available. An update should always be per�
formed before an upgrade or dist-upgrade. Please be aware that
the overall progress meter will be incorrect as the size of the
package files cannot be known in advance.


upgrade
upgrade is used to install the newest versions of all packages
currently installed on the system from the sources enumerated in
/etc/apt/sources.list. Packages currently installed with new
versions available are retrieved and upgraded; under no circum�
stances are currently installed packages removed, or packages
not already installed retrieved and installed. New versions of
currently installed packages that cannot be upgraded without
changing the install status of another package will be left at
their current version. An update must be performed first so that
apt-get knows that new versions of packages are available.


dselect-upgrade
dselect-upgrade is used in conjunction with the traditional De�
bian packaging front-end, dselect(8). dselect-upgrade follows
the changes made by dselect(8) to the Status field of available
packages, and performs the actions necessary to realize that
state (for instance, the removal of old and the installation of
new packages).


dist-upgrade
dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of upgrade,
also intelligently handles changing dependencies with new ver�
sions of packages; apt-get has a "smart" conflict resolution
system, and it will attempt to upgrade the most important pack�
ages at the expense of less important ones if necessary. The
/etc/apt/sources.list file contains a list of locations from
which to retrieve desired package files. See also apt_preferâ€â€�
ences(5) for a mechanism for overriding the general settings for
individual packages.


install
install is followed by one or more packages desired for instal�
lation. Each package is a package name, not a fully qualified
filename (for instance, in a Debian GNU/Linux system, libc6
would be the argument provided, not libc6_1.9.6-2.deb) All pack�
ages required by the package(s) specified for installation will
also be retrieved and installed. The /etc/apt/sources.list file
is used to locate the desired packages. If a hyphen is appended
to the package name (with no intervening space), the identified
package will be removed if it is installed. Similarly a plus
sign can be used to designate a package to install. These latter
features may be used to override decisions made by apt-get’s
conflict resolution system.

A specific version of a package can be selected for installation
by following the package name with an equals and the version of
the package to select. This will cause that version to be locat�
ed and selected for install. Alternatively a specific distribu�
tion can be selected by following the package name with a slash
and the version of the distribution or the Archive name (stable,
testing, unstable).

Both of the version selection mechanisms can downgrade packages
and must be used with care.

Finally, the apt_preferences(5) mechanism allows you to create
an alternative installation policy for individual packages.

If no package matches the given expression and the expression
contains one of ’.’, ’?’ or ’*’ then it is assumed to be a POSIX
regular expression, and it is applied to all package names in
the database. Any matches are then installed (or removed). Note
that matching is done by substring so ’lo.*’ matches ’how-lo’
and ’lowest’. If this is undesired, anchor the regular expres�
sion with a ’^’ or ’$’ character, or create a more specific reg�
ular expression.


remove remove is identical to install except that packages are removed
instead of installed. If a plus sign is appended to the package
name (with no intervening space), the identified package will be
installed instead of removed.


source source causes apt-get to fetch source packages. APT will examine
the available packages to decide which source package to fetch.
It will then find and download into the current directory the
newest available version of that source package. Source packages
are tracked separately from binary packages via deb-src type
lines in the sources.list(5) file. This probably will mean that
you will not get the same source as the package you have in�
stalled or as you could install. If the --compile options is
specified then the package will be compiled to a binary .deb us�
ing dpkg-buildpackage, if --download-only is specified then the
source package will not be unpacked.

A specific source version can be retrieved by postfixing the
source name with an equals and then the version to fetch, simi�
lar to the mechanism used for the package files. This enables
exact matching of the source package name and version, implicit�
ly enabling the APT::Get::Only-Source option.

Note that source packages are not tracked like binary packages,
they exist only in the current directory and are similar to
downloading source tar balls.


build-dep
build-dep causes apt-get to install/remove packages in an at�
tempt to satisfy the build dependencies for a source package.


check check is a diagnostic tool; it updates the package cache and
checks for broken dependencies.


clean clean clears out the local repository of retrieved package
files. It removes everything but the lock file from
/var/cache/apt/archives/ and /var/cache/apt/archives/partial/.
When APT is used as a dselect(8) method, clean is run automati�
cally. Those who do not use dselect will likely want to run
apt-get clean from time to time to free up disk space.


autoclean
Like clean, autoclean clears out the local repository of re�
trieved package files. The difference is that it only removes
package files that can no longer be downloaded, and are largely
useless. This allows a cache to be maintained over a long period
without it growing out of control. The configuration option
APT::Clean-Installed will prevent installed packages from being
erased if it is set to off.


OPTIONS
All command line options may be set using the configuration file, the
descriptions indicate the configuration option to set. For boolean op�
tions you can override the config file by using something like
-f-,--no-f, -f=no or several other variations.


-d, --download-only
Download only; package files are only retrieved, not unpacked or
installed. Configuration Item: APT::Get::Download-Only.


-f, --fix-broken
Fix; attempt to correct a system with broken dependencies in
place. This option, when used with install/remove, can omit any
packages to permit APT to deduce a likely solution. Any Package
that are specified must completely correct the problem. The op�
tion is sometimes necessary when running APT for the first time;
APT itself does not allow broken package dependencies to exist
on a system. It is possible that a system’s dependency structure
can be so corrupt as to require manual intervention (which usu�
ally means using dselect(8) or dpkg --remove to eliminate some
of the offending packages). Use of this option together with -m
may produce an error in some situations. Configuration Item:
APT::Get::Fix-Broken.


-m, --ignore-missing, --fix-missing
Ignore missing packages; If packages cannot be retrieved or fail
the integrity check after retrieval (corrupted package files),
hold back those packages and handle the result. Use of this op�
tion together with -f may produce an error in some situations.
If a package is selected for installation (particularly if it is
mentioned on the command line) and it could not be downloaded
then it will be silently held back. Configuration Item:
APT::Get::Fix-Missing.


--no-download
Disables downloading of packages. This is best used with --igâ€â€�
nore-missing to force APT to use only the .debs it has already
downloaded. Configuration Item: APT::Get::Download.


-q, --quiet
Quiet; produces output suitable for logging, omitting progress
indicators. More q’s will produce more quiet up to a maximum of
2. You can also use -q=# to set the quiet level, overriding the
configuration file. Note that quiet level 2 implies -y, you
should never use -qq without a no-action modifier such as -d,
--print-uris or -s as APT may decided to do something you did
not expect. Configuration Item: quiet.


-s, --simulate, --just-print, --dry-run, --recon, --no-act
No action; perform a simulation of events that would occur but
do not actually change the system. Configuration Item:
APT::Get::Simulate.

Simulate prints out a series of lines each one representing a
dpkg operation, Configure (Conf), Remove (Remv), Unpack (Inst).
Square brackets indicate broken packages with and empty set of
square brackets meaning breaks that are of no consequence
(rare).


-y, --yes, --assume-yes
Automatic yes to prompts; assume "yes" as answer to all prompts
and run non-interactively. If an undesirable situation, such as
changing a held package, trying to install a unauthenticated
package or removing an essential package occurs then apt-get
will abort. Configuration Item: APT::Get::Assume-Yes.


-u, --show-upgraded
Show upgraded packages; Print out a list of all packages that
are to be upgraded. Configuration Item: APT::Get::Show-Upgraded.


-V, --verbose-versions
Show full versions for upgraded and installed packages. Configu�
ration Item: APT::Get::Show-Versions.


-b, --compile, --build
Compile source packages after downloading them. Configuration
Item: APT::Get::Compile.


--ignore-hold
Ignore package Holds; This causes apt-get to ignore a hold
placed on a package. This may be useful in conjunction with
dist-upgrade to override a large number of undesired holds. Con�
figuration Item: APT::Ignore-Hold.


--no-upgrade
Do not upgrade packages; When used in conjunction with install,
no-upgrade will prevent packages on the command line from being
upgraded if they are already installed. Configuration Item:
APT::Get::Upgrade.


--force-yes
Force yes; This is a dangerous option that will cause apt to
continue without prompting if it is doing something potentially
harmful. It should not be used except in very special situa�
tions. Using force-yes can potentially destroy your system! Con�
figuration Item: APT::Get::force-yes.


--print-uris
Instead of fetching the files to install their URIs are printed.
Each URI will have the path, the destination file name, the size
and the expected md5 hash. Note that the file name to write to
will not always match the file name on the remote site! This al�
so works with the source and update commands. When used with the
update command the MD5 and size are not included, and it is up
to the user to decompress any compressed files. Configuration
Item: APT::Get::Print-URIs.


--purge
Use purge instead of remove for anything that would be removed.
An asterisk ("*") will be displayed next to packages which are
scheduled to be purged. Configuration Item: APT::Get::Purge.


--reinstall
Re-Install packages that are already installed and at the newest
version. Configuration Item: APT::Get::ReInstall.


--list-cleanup
This option defaults to on, use --no-list-cleanup to turn it
off. When on apt-get will automatically manage the contents of
/var/lib/apt/lists to ensure that obsolete files are erased. The
only reason to turn it off is if you frequently change your
source list. Configuration Item: APT::Get::List-Cleanup.


-t, --target-release, --default-release
This option controls the default input to the policy engine, it
creates a default pin at priority 990 using the specified re�
lease string. The preferences file may further override this
setting. In short, this option lets you have simple control over
which distribution packages will be retrieved from. Some common
examples might be -t â€â€™2.1*â€â€™ or -t unstable. Configuration Item:
APT::Default-Release; see also the apt_preferences(5) manual
page.


--trivial-only
Only perform operations that are ’trivial’. Logically this can
be considered related to --assume-yes, where --assume-yes will
answer yes to any prompt, --trivial-only will answer no. Config�
uration Item: APT::Get::Trivial-Only.


--no-remove
If any packages are to be removed apt-get immediately aborts
without prompting. Configuration Item: APT::Get::Remove.


--only-source
Only has meaning for the source and build-dep commands. Indi�
cates that the given source names are not to be mapped through
the binary table. This means that if this option is specified,
these commands will only accept source package names as argu�
ments, rather than accepting binary package names and looking up
the corresponding source package. Configuration Item:
APT::Get::Only-Source.


--diff-only, --tar-only
Download only the diff or tar file of a source archive. Configu�
ration Item: APT::Get::Diff-Only and APT::Get::Tar-Only.


--arch-only
Only process architecture-dependent build-dependencies. Configu�
ration Item: APT::Get::Arch-Only.


--allow-unauthenticated
Ignore if packages can’t be authenticated and don’t prompt about
it. This is usefull for tools like pbuilder. Configuration Item:
APT::Get::AllowUnauthenticated.


-h, --help
Show a short usage summary.


-v, --version
Show the program version.


-c, --config-file
Configuration File; Specify a configuration file to use. The
program will read the default configuration file and then this
configuration file. See apt.conf(5) for syntax information.


-o, --option
Set a Configuration Option; This will set an arbitary configura�
tion option. The syntax is -o Foo::Bar=bar.


FILES
/etc/apt/sources.list
Locations to fetch packages from. Configuration Item:
Dir::Etc::SourceList.


/etc/apt/apt.conf
APT configuration file. Configuration Item: Dir::Etc::Main.


/etc/apt/apt.conf.d/
APT configuration file fragments Configuration Item:
Dir::Etc::Parts.


/etc/apt/preferences
Version preferences file. This is where you would specify "pin�
ning", i.e. a preference to get certain packages from a separate
source or from a different version of a distribution. Configura�
tion Item: Dir::Etc::Preferences.


/var/cache/apt/archives/
Storage area for retrieved package files. Configuration Item:
Dir::Cache::Archives.


/var/cache/apt/archives/partial/
Storage area for package files in transit. Configuration Item:
Dir::Cache::Archives (implicit partial).


/var/lib/apt/lists/
Storage area for state information for each package resource
specified in sources.list(5) Configuration Item:
Dir::State::Lists.


/var/lib/apt/lists/partial/
Storage area for state information in transit. Configuration
Item: Dir::State::Lists (implicit partial).


SEE ALSO
apt-cache(8), apt-cdrom(8), dpkg(8), dselect(8), sources.list(5),
apt.conf(5), apt-config(8), The APT User’s guide in
/usr/share/doc/apt-doc/, apt_preferences(5), the APT Howto.


DIAGNOSTICS
apt-get returns zero on normal operation, decimal 100 on error.


BUGS
APT bug page: http://bugs.debian.org/src:apt. If you wish to report a
bug in APT, please see /usr/share/doc/debian/bug-reporting.txt or the
reportbug(1) command.


AUTHORS
Jason Gunthorpe, APT team.



Linux 29 February 2004 APT-GET(8)

[Circus-Killer]

apt-get has never failed me.

[glotz]

Actually, no. Please let me know if you find it.

I meant I couldn't find it there. The question was, how did you learn about it? :D

[aysiu]

I meant I couldn't find it there. The question was, how did you learn about it? :D
I found it in this thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1795909#post1795909).

Yeah, I have no idea how people pick up these things when they're no in the man page...

[glotz]

Thanks. Brand new stuff I figure.

[danielph]

Just flicked through this thread as I was installing gnome on a server base install. I normally use aptitude as it seems to be better. Just as a comparision I have an example I thought I should share.

When using aptitude from a server install with just some xvideo drivers loaded I typed

sudo aptitude install gnome-core427 newly installed packages and also a gamin dependency conflict.
118MB/154MB with 624MB used after unpacking.


sudo apt-get install gnome-core297 packages newly installed
47.6MB/72.7MB with 371MB used after unpacking

Aptitude is pulling many more packages in on just installing gnome-core. A big difference. It makes me wonder if the apt-get is incomplete or aptitude is installing a lot of stuff I don't really need or want.
Can anyone explain this difference please?

[Reshin]

Aptitude marks recommended packages as dependencies

[raul_]

sorry, i don't feel like reading 15 pages so i don't know if this has been brought up but...sometimes aptitude tells you to run an apt-get command when it can't handle something, so...i guess i would use aptitude most of the times, but it's not (maybe just yet?) 100% bullet proof, since it needs a little help from apt-get

[danielph]

Aptitude marks recommended packages as dependenciesAh ha. Thanks for that.

A little research and you can use -R to stop this or change ~/aptitude/config (/etc/apt/apt.conf in apt)

[dbbolton]

aptitude.

[mcduck]

I've had some troubles using Aptitude, for example the last time I used it to install Kubuntu-desktop and day after that tried to remove KDE again Aptitude wanted to remove about half of my system.

I like apt-get, deborphan has helped me to remove orphaned dependencies and with the apt-get's new autoremove feature I don't really see any reason to use Aptitude.

[rocknrolf77]

What do you use. apt-get or aptitude ? Aptitude handles dependencies better so i just wondered how many people use apt-get and why? :)

[Reshin]

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=294135&highlight=aptitude+vs+apt-get

[rocknrolf77]

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=294135&highlight=aptitude+vs+apt-get

Searched for several things about aptitude vs apt-get. Haven't seen that poll. :) The forum is getting a lot of users and threads now. The bigger the forum the more ubuntu users so nothing negative with that, just that searching the threads gives you (maybe too many hits).

[AlanRogers]

I use Aptitude at the command line, which I usually use if I'm trying out anything new, so I can uninstall with impunity. If Aptitude had a good graphical interface, I wouldn't use anything else.

[aysiu]

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=294135&highlight=aptitude+vs+apt-get
Merged.

[qalimas]

I favor aptitude, and manage my applications via Konsole. Something I like about Aptitude is typing just 'sudo aptitude' in a server install gives you a sort of GUIish frontend, and if you have the program that lets you use the mouse in terminal, it's pretty nifty =)

[AlanRogers]

Well, for some people, it's a hard drive space issue, especially if you have a drive or partition that's 6 GB or lessI'm one of those - running Ubuntu 6.06 on a 400Mhz, 512MB, 8GB machine and it runs fine. I'll be starting another thread to hopefully get an answer to the pickle I've now put myself in. I prefer aptitude while I'm learning but I'm not afraid of the CLI. I've already reinstalled several times, as I try out different configurations, including a text-only install server and adding packages on top.

[aysiu]

Now that I'm using Edgy, I think I'm going to go back to using apt-get instead of aptitude. Sometimes aptitude tries to be too "smart" and remove packages I don't want it to remove. And now (as of Edgy) apt-get has the autoremove option to remove unused dependencies.

[Quillz]

I prefer apt-get.

[Pobega]

I personally always use aptitude, I'm very anal when it comes to unused libraries on my computer and I'd rather have them taken off than wasting space.

[FyreBrand]

I'm testing out how apt-get works for me. I did a reinstall and have only used apt-get with no aptitude or adept installer. I've never really used the ncurses interface of aptitude. I just like how it functions in the konsole.

These are couple of observations I've made so far:
1. Aptitude is much friendlier to new users. It makes all the decisions for you and seems to allow greater flexibility with suggested and recommended packages.

2. It seems apt-get installs fewer packages as it doesn't automatically include recommended or suggested packages, but only what's required for the installed packages functioning. I like this because it doesn't install a bunch of unnecessary packages. I don't like it because I'm often not sure what recommends or suggests I should manually add if any. I still don't know what the difference between a suggest and a recommend is so I need to learn that. Thus why I feel it's a little less gentle for the less experienced person.

3. I haven't found a way to search packages using apt-get. I just read the man pages so maybe more complete documentation will explain how. So I still use "aptitude search" and "aptitude show" to find package names and descriptions. If apt-get doesn't have a search feature I would consider that a big drawback. I certainly question whether it has super cow powers if it lacks search. (just kidding)

4. As far as I can tell aptitude lacks the build feature that apt-get has. I really like that feature.

I'm still not very comfortable with apt-get, but it's only been a few days so I have to give it more time.

[rai4shu2]

You use apt-cache to search for packages, dpkg -S to search for files in the packages.

[FyreBrand]

rai4shu2 - Thanks for the information. I like that command a lot. It provides a lot of information.

[Nikron]

Personally, I use apt-get since it has super moo cow powers. Which one do you use more often? Or which one did you use for which kind of tasks?

[Pugwash]

I use aptitude, I read somewhere that its better. No idea why though.

[Nikron]

I use aptitude, I read somewhere that its better. No idea why though.

Well, it is a higher level interface. I suppose that makes it easier to use.

[TheRingmaster]

aptitude remembers dependencies. so when you want to install a program with lots of dependencies like kde, you have a MUCH easier time uninstalling it later.

[raublekick]

i just stick with apt-get. i know aptitude has better dependancy handling, but I generally don't install things that require its use (such as removing KDE).

[aysiu]

I've merged this with the other thread on the same topic.

I'm keeping the new poll, though, since apt-get now (as of Edgy Eft) has the autoremove feature, which puts it on par with aptitude.

For posterity, I've attached the old poll, though, that got lost in the merger.

[FyreBrand]

Thanks for resurrecting this thread. I've been thinking about posting back in it for a while now.

I started out using aptitude because it simplifies the dependency process. On install, by default, it pulls in recommends and maybe suggests (I'm not sure about that part though). This is really helpful for a newer user because it's a lot just to get familiar with package management let alone try and understand dependencies. It does handle package removal and cleaning okay, but sometimes it's a little too smart for it's own good. When this happens it wants to remove important packages and can even prevent new package installation until it's had it's "problem" solved.

When I first read this thread I decided to start using apt-get as an experiment and to compare. At first I didn't like it because it doesn't automatically install recommends and suggests. That meant I had to make decisions about what additional packages to install. This made it harder, but in the end I learn more about the packages I choose to install. It also means I install a lot less baggage packages. This started to really sell me on apt-get.

For example I installed a very simple development web server. It was a standard Apache2, PHP, MySQL stack. When I installed this with aptitude a ton of extra packages I didn't need were installed such as postfix. I didn't want or need a mail server and even though I configured it not to do anything it was still there taking up space and running as a service taking up resources. When I install the AMP stack with apt-get mailx and postfix are recommended packages and don't get installed by default. In fact there are several other packages that don't get installed that I don't need.

You can configure the apt config file to change any default behavior but the fact is that apt-get uses a more conservative install philosophy and I like that. It only installs the packages you need to actually get the application running.

Apt-get also does autoremove and purging quite well. I've had far fewer dependency glitches with apt-get and as a result smoother dist-upgrades.

One thing I still use aptitude for is searching. Aptitude has a great searching tool. Apt-cache is good but aptitude offers a few more pieces of information. When you "aptitude search" a package I like how it tells you the install status of that package. It also searches packages a little more restrictively and I like that because the list is shorter and usually with more relevant results. When you "aptitude show" a package it not only tells you all the details apt-cache has, but also if the package is installed. I do use apt-cache but normally only to compare what I find with aptitude's search.

[BarfBag]

I prefer apt-get over aptitude.

Aptitude claims that it handles dependencies better, but from my experience - it tries too hard. I've had quite a few packages that didn't run after upgrading/installing them with it.

[mal]

This has been a great discussion, but I'd like to throw in a new question:

Since Synaptic is the Ubuntu standard GUI installation tool, is there any way to configure it to behave like Aptitude (or apt-get -autoremove)?

I find Synaptic useful when searching for packages but often use apt-get or aptitude for installing and uninstalling from the command line. It would be good if Synaptic would also clean up unused dependancies like Aptitude does.


Mal

[FyreBrand]

This has been a great discussion, but I'd like to throw in a new question:

Since Synaptic is the Ubuntu standard GUI installation tool, is there any way to configure it to behave like Aptitude (or apt-get -autoremove)?

I find Synaptic useful when searching for packages but often use apt-get or aptitude for installing and uninstalling from the command line. It would be good if Synaptic would also clean up unused dependancies like Aptitude does.


MalIt's been a while since I've used Synaptic, but I think the option "completely remove" will do that. Try this as a test. Find an application with only a few dependencies that aren't tied to other apps. Install it with Synaptic and then select "completely remove" and see if it removes the depends as well. I would like to know if it works.

[Quillz]

I've never tried Aptitude, actually. I might use it over Adept if the latter keeps timing out on large updates, though.

[mal]

It's been a while since I've used Synaptic, but I think the option "completely remove" will do that. Try this as a test. Find an application with only a few dependencies that aren't tied to other apps. Install it with Synaptic and then select "completely remove" and see if it removes the depends as well. I would like to know if it works.

FyreBrand,

You might be right, but I thought "completely remove" was equivalent to the "apt-get --purge remove" option and that this removes all configuration files, etc. associated with each package.

I guess I should do some experimenting to figure out how Synaptic behaves with the different available options.

Mal

[FyreBrand]

FyreBrand,

You might be right, but I thought "completely remove" was equivalent to the "apt-get --purge remove" option and that this removes all configuration files, etc. associated with each package.

I guess I should do some experimenting to figure out how Synaptic behaves with the different available options.

MalYeah that could be true. I can't remember, but if you feel like doing the experiment I would like to hear the results. Like I said it's been quite a while since I've used Synaptic.

[yigal.weinstein]

aysiu geese I just knee jerk voted for aptitude but upon reading the dependency considerations in the new apt-get I think its a toss up and who doesn't want super cow powers. Maybe I will have to start using apt-get. Does apt-cache have as good an ability as aptitude search for finding packages with given traits?

[Enigmus]

I use apt-get just about all the time. I have only used Aptitude twice. Still, if I want to view packages by a list if I don't know for sure on something, then yeah. I'd agree that Aptitude has it's pluses. But since I usually know what I want, I just find apt-get to be a lot easier.

[Ramses de Norre]

The only disadvantage I know is the already pointed out meta-package removal thing (which mostly is an advantage, but sometimes a disadvantage...)
As you can see, when I want to remove ubuntu-desktop (or any of it's packages) other packages I frequently use like OOo, gedit, gconf-editor, ... are also removed.

So I always use aptitude instead when removing packages as ubuntu-desktop.

ramses@icarus:~$ sudo aptitude remove ubuntu-desktop
Password:
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Reading extended state information
Initialising package states... Done
Building tag database... Done
The following packages are unused and will be REMOVED:
apport apport-gtk at-spi avahi-daemon binfmt-support bittorrent
bluez-cups bluez-pin bluez-utils brltty brltty-x11 bsh bug-buddy
cli-common contact-lookup-applet cupsys-driver-gutenprint dc
diveintopython edgy-community-wallpapers edgy-gdm-themes
edgy-session-splashes edgy-wallpapers ekiga eog esound evolution-exchange
evolution-webcal example-content f-spot festival festlex-cmu
festlex-poslex festvox-kallpc16k file-roller firefox-gnome-support
foo2zjs foomatic-db-hpijs fping gaim gaim-data gcalctool gconf-editor
gdebi gdm gedit gedit-common gimp gimp-data gimp-print gimp-python
gnome-accessibility-themes gnome-btdownload gnome-cups-manager
gnome-keyring-manager gnome-mag gnome-nettool gnome-orca
gnome-screensaver gnome-spell gnome-system-tools gnome-themes
gnome-volume-manager gray-theme gstreamer0.10-plugins-base-apps
gstreamer0.10-tools gthumb gtk2-engines gtk2-engines-ubuntulooks
gucharmap hal-device-manager hotkey-setup hpijs hplip hplip-data
human-cursors-theme human-gtk-theme human-icon-theme human-theme
hwdb-client-common hwdb-client-gnome industrialtango-theme
landscape-client language-selector language-selector-common
legacyhuman-theme lftp libatspi1.0-0 libavahi-core4 libbeecrypt6
libbluetooth2 libbrlapi1 libbtctl4 libdaemon0 libdbus-1-cil libestools1.2
libgadu3 libgconf2.0-cil libgimp2.0 libglade2.0-cil libglew1
libglib2.0-cil libgmime-2.0-2 libgmime2.2-cil libgnome-mag2
libgnome-speech3 libgnome2.0-cil libgnomebt0 libgnomecupsui1.0-1c2a
libgnomevfs2-bin libgpod0 libgtk2.0-cil libgutenprint2 libgutenprintui2-1
libhsqldb-java libicu34 libjline-java libmdbtools libmeanwhile1
libmono-cairo1.0-cil libmono-corlib1.0-cil libmono-data-tds1.0-cil
libmono-security1.0-cil libmono-sharpzip0.84-cil libmono-sqlite1.0-cil
libmono-system-data1.0-cil libmono-system-web1.0-cil
libmono-system1.0-cil libmono0 libmono1.0-cil libopal-2.2.0
libopenobex-1.0-0 libportaudio0 libpt-1.10.0 libpt-plugins-alsa
libpt-plugins-v4l libpt-plugins-v4l2 librpm4 libscim8c2a libsensors3
libservlet2.3-java libsnmp-base libsnmp9 libsqlite3-0 libstlport4.6c2
libuniconf4.2 libwpd8c2a libwvstreams4.2-base libwvstreams4.2-extras
libxalan2-java libxevie1 libxmlsec1 libxmlsec1-nss libxmlsec1-openssl
libxplc0.3.13 libxt-java min12xxw mono-common mono-gac mono-jit
mono-runtime nautilus-sendto onboard openoffice.org openoffice.org-base
openoffice.org-calc openoffice.org-common openoffice.org-core
openoffice.org-draw openoffice.org-evolution openoffice.org-gnome
openoffice.org-gtk openoffice.org-impress openoffice.org-java-common
openoffice.org-math openoffice.org-style-default
openoffice.org-style-industrial openoffice.org-writer outdoors-theme
pkg-config pnm2ppa powernowd python-apport-utils python-at-spi
python-problem-report python-uno python-virtkey python-xml rdesktop
readahead resilience-theme rhythmbox rpm rss-glx scim scim-gtk2-immodule
scim-modules-socket screen screensaver-default-images serpentine
silicon-theme slocate sound-juicer ssh-askpass-gnome tangerine-icon-theme
tango-icon-theme tango-icon-theme-common tomboy totem tsclient
ttf-arabeyes ttf-arphic-ukai ttf-arphic-uming ttf-baekmuk
ttf-bengali-fonts ttf-devanagari-fonts ttf-gentium ttf-gujarati-fonts
ttf-indic-fonts ttf-kannada-fonts ttf-kochi-gothic ttf-kochi-mincho
ttf-lao ttf-malayalam-fonts ttf-mgopen ttf-opensymbol ttf-oriya-fonts
ttf-punjabi-fonts ttf-tamil-fonts ttf-telugu-fonts ttf-thai-tlwg
ubuntu-artwork ubuntu-docs ubuntu-sounds update-notifier usplash
usplash-theme-ubuntu vino vnc-common whois wvdial xcursor-themes
xfonts-100dpi xfonts-75dpi xfonts-base xfonts-scalable xorg xsane
xsane-common xscreensaver-data xscreensaver-gl xvncviewer zip
The following packages will be REMOVED:
ubuntu-desktop
0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 253 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0B of archives. After unpacking 765MB will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?]



PS: when you count the keystrokes needed to install a package when using tab completion, you'll see you type less with aptitude ;)

[igknighted]

Now that apt-get has autoremove, whats really the difference? Aside from it takes one more step to get rid of the orphaned dependencies?

[aysiu]

Now that apt-get has autoremove, whats really the difference? Aside from it takes one more step to get rid of the orphaned dependencies?
Not everyone's using Edgy Eft. Many people are still on 6.06 (Dapper Drake).

[Nikron]

The only problem I've ever had with apt-get is when I removed xbindkeys once. It for some reason wanted to auto remove my network-manager package... which I obviously need =P

Aptitude I dislike because it tends to spit out more text than apt-get, which can get annoying.

[Izkata]

Not everyone's using Edgy Eft. Many people are still on 6.06 (Dapper Drake).

I feel this thread deserves a bump, as I just ran across this (http://lifehacker.com/367714/run-windows-apps-seamlessly-inside-linux) post on Lifehacker. They're using aptitude in this post, whereas they've previously always used apt-get....

So I checked something out:


izkata@Izz:~$ sudo aptitude install virtualbox-ose virtualbox-ose-modules-generic
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Reading extended state information
Initializing package states... Done
Building tag database... Done
The following NEW packages will be automatically installed:
dpatch fakeroot kbuild libxalan110 libxerces27 module-assistant
patchutils virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.22-14-generic virtualbox-ose-source
The following packages have been kept back:
language-pack-en language-pack-gnome-en
The following NEW packages will be installed:
dpatch fakeroot kbuild libxalan110 libxerces27 module-assistant
patchutils virtualbox-ose virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.22-14-generic
virtualbox-ose-source
0 packages upgraded, 10 newly installed, 0 to remove and 2 not upgraded.
Need to get 9614kB of archives. After unpacking 31.7MB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] n



izkata@Izz:~$ sudo apt-get install virtualbox-ose virtualbox-ose-modules-generic
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Note, selecting virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.22-14-generic instead of virtualbox-ose-modules-generic
The following extra packages will be installed:
libxalan110 libxerces27 virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.22-14-generic
Suggested packages:
xalan
Recommended packages:
virtualbox-ose-source
The following NEW packages will be installed:
libxalan110 libxerces27 virtualbox-ose
virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.22-14-generic
0 upgraded, 4 newly installed, 0 to remove and 2 not upgraded.
Need to get 8574kB of archives.
After unpacking 28.3MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n


So... If package tracking for removing packages was the only difference (which was added to apt-get in Edgy anyway), why is there a difference here? This thread is still one of the top Google results for the search: "apt-get" aptitude

EDIT: Okay, semi-idiotic me. This thread is 20 pages and the last page didn't really answer my question, which is why I made this post - but my question was partially answered on page 19 by FyreBrand.

I only say "partially", though, because even adding the packages apt-get suggests to the install line... The package names match up perfectly, but the amount to be downloaded and the space it will take up after unpacking still differs. (Granted it's only by a very tiny amount, but I still wonder why as they both should be doing the same thing at that point)

[aysiu]

I feel this thread deserves a bump, as I just ran across this (http://lifehacker.com/367714/run-windows-apps-seamlessly-inside-linux) post on Lifehacker. They're using aptitude in this post, whereas they've previously always used apt-get....

So I checked something out:


izkata@Izz:~$ sudo aptitude install virtualbox-ose virtualbox-ose-modules-generic
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Reading extended state information
Initializing package states... Done
Building tag database... Done
The following NEW packages will be automatically installed:
dpatch fakeroot kbuild libxalan110 libxerces27 module-assistant
patchutils virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.22-14-generic virtualbox-ose-source
The following packages have been kept back:
language-pack-en language-pack-gnome-en
The following NEW packages will be installed:
dpatch fakeroot kbuild libxalan110 libxerces27 module-assistant
patchutils virtualbox-ose virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.22-14-generic
virtualbox-ose-source
0 packages upgraded, 10 newly installed, 0 to remove and 2 not upgraded.
Need to get 9614kB of archives. After unpacking 31.7MB will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n/?] n



izkata@Izz:~$ sudo apt-get install virtualbox-ose virtualbox-ose-modules-generic
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Note, selecting virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.22-14-generic instead of virtualbox-ose-modules-generic
The following extra packages will be installed:
libxalan110 libxerces27 virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.22-14-generic
Suggested packages:
xalan
Recommended packages:
virtualbox-ose-source
The following NEW packages will be installed:
libxalan110 libxerces27 virtualbox-ose
virtualbox-ose-modules-2.6.22-14-generic
0 upgraded, 4 newly installed, 0 to remove and 2 not upgraded.
Need to get 8574kB of archives.
After unpacking 28.3MB of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue [Y/n]? n


So... If package tracking for removing packages was the only difference (which was added to apt-get in Edgy anyway), why is there a difference here? This thread is still one of the top Google results for the search: "apt-get" aptitude
I'm not sure what you're trying to say. In your examples, you didn't remove anything--only installed (or were about to install).

In any case, most of the advantages of aptitude have been made moot by the advent of autoremove to apt-get, as of Ubuntu 6.10 (a year and a half ago).

[koenn]

I didn't read the 194 posts here, so maybe this has been mentioned before : 1 downside of aptitude compared to apt-get is that aptitude by default treats "recommends" (recommended packages, not real dependencies but something along the lines of 'if you install xyz, you probably also going to want abc and dfg) as dependencies,
This is probably a configurable option that happens to be on by default, so maybe it doesn't count as a downside to apt, but it can unexpectedly pull in a lot of extra packages if you don't pay attention.

You can make apt-get behave the same way by calling it with the --with-recommends option

[Unanimated]

I just use apt-get more because it's easier to type than aptitude. With aptitude I sort of have to think about what I'm typing, but with apt-get I know what I'm typing, so I think it's a little faster. I also have localepurge installed, so I really don't need to worry about dependency removal.

[cardinals_fan]

I vote slapt-get :)

[doorknob60]

Aptitude (Ooh I tied up the poll 69-69 :lolflag:). I can install stuff and when I remove it later (if I do), then it makes sure all the crap that came with it goes away, assuming I don't need it for other programs. It just works better, and apt-get can cause headaches with that sort of thing (uninstalling DE's...yeah). Also, it's recommended by the Debian devs over apt-get :)

[Vivaldi Gloria]

But no one uses apt-get on its own. You can't even search with it. You also use the other apt-* tools: apt-cache, apt-file, apt-rdepends, apt-key etc. Can aptitude match all these? I doubt that.

Btw, how do you do the following with aptitude?


apt-rdepends <package>

List all recursive dependencies, i.e. list deps, deps of deps, ... so on.


sudo apt-get build-dep <package>

Install packages needed to install <package> from source.


apt-get --print-uris install <package>

Get the download adress of the package.


apt-cache dump

Gives info about ALL packages.


apt-cache stats

All about package numbers.


apt-cache showsrc <package>

Deps & build deps.