On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 07:01:53AM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:35:02PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 08:19:58PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:25:02AM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West <[EMAIL > > > PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > > > > > > > > this bothers me, since I mostly use aptitude. When I need a build-dep > > > > or source, I'm concerned that later aptitude may wipe something > > > > inadvertantly. Do you know if there are plans to implement these > > > > commands into aptitude? Or will apt-get always remain, so that its not > > > > a problem? > > > > > > aptitude shouldn't wipe out packages installed with apt-get, period > > > full stop. > > > > you know, that wasn't fair of me. I was once concerned about that > > problem, but have subsequently learned that it really doesn't > > happen. So i apologise if that came across wrong. > > No, I just come down hard on this meme because it seems to have taken > on a life of its own and I'd like to squash it before it grows up into a > full-blown urban legend.
That sounds good, but is it different now than it used to be? I haven't tried it lately, but it used to "seem" to want to remove lots of things. I'm aware of the workarounds (keep-all or whatever), have followed most of the threads (even instigated some...), but am still a command-line apt-get user waiting for a reason to change. Two problems I have with aptitude are the lack of "source" functionality and my inability to spell it as easily as apt-get. ;-) Ken -- Ken Irving, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
