On Sat, Nov 13, 2004 at 08:01:14PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote: > On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 12:13:05AM +0000, Brian Nelson wrote: > > This is another good example of why apt-get should be avoided, since it > > gave absolutely no indication as to the problem you correctly diagnosed. > > Funny, I was able to easily diagnose what was going on. :) It's not like > it was hard to figure out what those three packages had in common.
But apt-get didn't tell you, and that's something an APT frontend should do, IMO. If everyone didn't use apt-get, we wouldn't have so many of these rather dumb questions appearing on the list. It is possible to effectively manage your system with only apt-get, apt-cache, etc., but I think that's best left to people that know what they're doing. > > The OP should use a real APT front-end. > > Anything as long as it's not aptitude. Aptitude does an OK job in this respect. It doesn't make conflict resolution completely obvious, but the information is there. -- For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
