...that since lenny it's safe to mix the two because a. apt-get now
handles (or can handle)orphans similarly thanks to autoremove and also
uses the same database or better yet, has the same markings for
automatically installed vs manually installed?
I've been browsing for this for a while now and the official
documentation is never really clear on that and in forum there's nothing
but arguing about the fact. anyway - maybe someone in here knows for
sure and has some sort of convincing "proof":D
If it's not I'll have to stick with apt-get but if it is that would be
awesome for apt-pinning because aptitude is better at satisfying
dependencies when installing packages from a lowly pinned source.
apt-get only uses the highest priority version of a package unless you
specify a target release with something like let's say -t experimental
but then it will get ALL dependencies form experimental even if some of
them could've been satisfied from unstable or testing.
so let's say "foo" from experimental needs "bar" from expreminental but
for "bla" the testing version would be enough- and let's also say bar
and bla are both in different versions on testing unstable and
experimental. Testing is pinned very high, experimental very low.
apt-get install foo/experimental will complain about needing bar in
version whatever but that's not to be installed
apt-get -t experimental install foo will install both bar and bla from
experimental
now if I make aptitude install foo, it's supposed to get bar from
experimental and bla from testing.
That would surely be a reason for me to switch. aptitude's snail-pace
would be a small price to pay.
so - any expeerts help a pinning newbie out?:D
