On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 11:45:49 -0400, Gregory Seidman wrote: > } > That's your problem. aptitude sucks. > } > } I always use something like "aptitude install -t version xxx". Aptitude > } remembers reverse dependencies, hence aptitude purge xxx will remove xxx > } and all it's deps, apt-get won't. > > This is the primary benefit I keep hearing about for aptitude over > apt-get. I just don't see it as particularly valuable. Let's talk use > cases: > > 1) ...
> 4) I am actually low on disk space and want to get rid of some > unused > packages to free some space. First off, disk space is cheap so this > is moderately unlikely to begin with. Second, apt-get clean is the > first step. Finally, I can use deborphan (or gtkorphan if I'm in a > GUI frame of mind) to get rid of unneeded or unused packages. > > That fourth use case is the only one that involves more effort when > using apt-get instead of aptitude. It's also an uncommon case, > especially as compared to the others. I don't consider it worth giving > up the simplicity of apt-get to optimize an uncommon use case. (How > uncommon is it? I think I've gone through it once in the past six years, > and that was on a machine with a 2GB HD.) I totally agree. apt-get is sufficient. If you worry about the unneeded packages, then use deborphan. I use it every time I install or un-install packages. no hassle at all. I never use aptitude, never need to and never want to. However, for all the apt-get lovers, we are fighting a loosing battle here. Some stupid packges (eg. tasksel) insist the dependency on aptitude. aptitude has to be in your system. I wish that could be changed, so I can have a clean Debian system. thanks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
