On Thu, 20 Mar 2008, Franklin PIAT wrote: > My rational is that some setup runs apt* updates automatically.
Huh? > If a user later use "aptitude install foo", it would install those > updates too, which leads the user to wonder "Why is that installing > verytinyhttpdaemon requires downloading 20Mb and tens of packages ?" > (ok my figures are overestimated, but you get the idea;) It won't unless you mark those packages for upgrading. If you do not, aptitude install won't do anything besides installing the packages that you've asked to have installed. > What benefit would there be in documenting "aptitude install" ? Because aptitude is the recommended frontend, and resolves problems far better than apt-get is currently able to do. It also properly handles automatically installed packages, allows users to choose which problem resolution they use, has a more powerfull package selection method, can handle queuing actions, has an ncurses interface, can show changelogs, can report bugs, can slice, can dice, can use the kitchen sink... Don Armstrong -- I shall require that [a scientific system's] logical form shall be such that it can be singled out, by means of emperical tests, in a negative sense: it must be possible for an emperical scientific system to be refuted by experience. -- Sir Karl Popper _Logic of Scientific Discovery_ ยง6 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
