On Lu, 09 iun 14, 14:55:26, Dalios wrote: > > Never tried apt before so after your message I decided to research a little. > Searching for info on apt is quite tricky as the web is full of pages on > apt-get and aptitude etc. Searching for "apt vs apt-get" returned this > reddit thread which is just a day old! > http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/26q2sm/apt_vs_aptget/ Well, apt 1.0 was released on 1 April, the web still has to catch up ;)
> I couldn't find a positive answer to my question so I post it here: Is apt > the same as apt-get? In other words does it resolve the dependencies with > the same or a different way? Both apt and apt-get are frontends to apt... hmm, let's try this again: APT (all caps) is the Advanced Packaging Tool, packaged in the apt source package, which compiles into the apt and libapt-pkg binary packages. The apt binary *package* contains several command-line tools that use libapt-pkg to do all the nice stuff we have been spoiled with in Debian. Apparently 'apt-get' was never meant to be a user tool, hence the introduction of the 'apt' *command*. Since 'apt' is a new command it doesn't have to be 100% backwards compatible with 'apt-get', therefore some of its commands have different names or behave slightly different than 'apt-get' (as per the DIFFERENCES TO APT-GET(8) section of apt(8)). However, both are using libapt-pkg and assuming you would pass all relevant options you should get identical results as with 'apt-get'. A note here regarding aptitude: while aptitude also uses libapt-pkg it also has it's own alternative dependency resolving algorithm, which is why you can get different results with aptitude (even if you account for the differences between 'upgrade' and 'safe-upgrade'). > Interestingly the "apt dist-upgrade" is not included in apt's man page! > There is the aptitude like "full-upgrade". Both seem to be working though! As far as I can tell (I didn't read the code) 'apt full-upgrade' is the exact equivalent of 'apt-get dist-upgrade'. IMVHO the renaming makes sense as the command is needed from time to time on testing and unstable and in very rare cases also on stable, not only for upgrades between releases. The old name is probably accepted to ease the transition for 'apt-get' users. Kind regards, Andrei -- http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
