On Wed 30 May 2018 at 08:59:31 +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 08:39:28PM +0100, Brian wrote: > > [...] > > > If a package is upgraded, surely a user would want any new packages > > to be installed if they are required to satisfy dependencies. apt's > > designed behaviour looks more sensible than apt-get's. > > False dichotomy. More "newbie friendly" maybe. And that is what it > was made for. For an experienced user, perhaps apt-get's behavior > makes more sense.
True, experienced users have to adjust to the change in behaviour (unless they were previously using --with-new-pkgs with apt-get), but it is hardly a seismic event. The unification of apt-get and apt-cache (some common directives only) is also beneficial to all users (the target group for apt usage). > Of course, it seems somewhat unfortunate that both apt and apt-get > use the same subcommand name for slightly different things. I agree, slightly inconvenient and takes some getting used to. We could now argue about when is an "upgrade" not an "upgrade"? :). -- Brian.
