On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 03:31:28PM -0400, Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was heard to say:
> I actually keep wondering why apt-get and aptitude are not merged into one
> (it looks like it good almost be done by just renaming aptitude to apt-get).
Mainly because aptitude is not apt-get. I'm
Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I actually keep wondering why apt-get and aptitude are not merged
> into one (it looks like it good almost be done by just renaming
> aptitude to apt-get).
See http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/06/msg00379.html and the
entire thread. Very intere
Joe Hart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If one uses only aptitude, there is no problem, but if one mixes the
> two commands, then aptitude will eventually get confused and want to
> remove vital components.
As said before in the original thread, this problem should be solved by
now. If you still en
On Wednesday 18 July 2007 21:31:28 Stefan Monnier wrote:
> >> Still, if you're used to apt-get, I don't really see a reason to switch.
> >> I always recommend aptitude, but never tell users to switch from apt-get
> >> on a running system. If I should, please let me know the reasons.
> >
> > The big
Andrei Popescu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 07:10:17AM +, Silke Suck wrote:
>
>> Still, if you're used to apt-get, I don't really see a reason to switch.
>> I always recommend aptitude, but never tell users to switch from apt-get
>> on a running system. If I should,
>> Still, if you're used to apt-get, I don't really see a reason to switch.
>> I always recommend aptitude, but never tell users to switch from apt-get
>> on a running system. If I should, please let me know the reasons.
> The biggest benefit (at least until the new apt) would be the automatic
>
6 matches
Mail list logo
