Tom, Thank you for the clarification... It seems that that I have been led astray by some PhD types. I'll undertake some additional self enlightenment.
Dave - KB3EFS On 01/04/2011 05:56 PM, Tom Hayward wrote: > On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 14:00, David A Aitcheson > <[email protected]> wrote: >> This is good! Â I find apt-get to be more versatile and understandable in >> the gnome environment... now the KDE environment is a totally different >> animal and that is where Aptitude is better suited. > > [Off topic] > > I'm not sure what you mean by apt-get being more versatile than > aptitude, or better suited to any particularly desktop environment. > Both are command line tools. Both install packages with dpkg. They > both install software exactly the same way. > > The difference is that aptitude keeps track of which packages were > installed as dependencies. You won't notice this until you go to > uninstall a package. When you uninstall a package with aptitude, it > will also uninstall that package's dependencies as long as they are > not needed for any other packages. This is different than > apt-get--apt-get will leave orphaned packages that were dependencies > of old uninstalled packages. > > Here is a write-up explaining the difference: > http://pthree.org/2007/08/12/aptitude-vs-apt-get/ > > Before you first use aptitude, you have to tell it that all of the > packages you previously installed with apt-get are not orphaned, and > you indeed want to keep them: > > # aptitude keep-all > > > Tom KD7LXL > -- David A Aitcheson [email protected] david.aitcheson on google and skype _______________________________________________ Xastir mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir
