Aptitude vs apt-get

[ElWray]

Somehow Amarok got broken a few hours ago and removing & reinstalling it with apt-get didn't work (I managed to remove it but then couldn't install because amarok-common needed a downgrade first).
Tried again, this time with aptitude and it did all that stuff that needed to be done.

So the question is: what are the major differences between the two and which would be better?

Cheers,
ElWray

[dibl]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

Aptitude, if you use it exclusively for installing packages, will build and maintain a database of dependencies. Therefore, if you decide later to remove a package, aptitude will "remember" to also remove all dependencies that are not needed by some other package.

http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/aptitude

Note that you cannot achieve any benefit by alternating between apt-get and aptitude -- they both will work, but the aptitude database requires that you only use aptitude.

[Rog131]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

> FAQ: Package Managers

> Aptitude wiki
> aptitude versus apt-get
> Aptitude vs Apt-get Comparison
> APT-GET OR APTITUDE ?
> aptitude vs. apt-get: what is the recommended (aka the “right”) tool to use actually?
> aptitude vs apt-get?
> HOWTO: use aptitude instead of synaptic and why.
> Why is aptitude being removed?
> etc ...

[kubicle]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

Aptitude, if you use it exclusively for installing packages, will build and maintain a database of dependencies. Therefore, if you decide later to remove a package, aptitude will "remember" to also remove all dependencies that are not needed by some other package.

Probably mentioned in the links provided in this thread, but apt-get/synaptic also "remember" all packages installed as dependencies, they just don't remove the dependencies automatically by default.

(with apt-get, you can use "apt-get autoremove" or "apt-get --auto-remove remove/purge" to clear unneeded dependencies...or use "APT::Get::AutomaticRemove" configuration tag to make auto-removing the default)

Personally I don't really like that much automagics, but we all have our preferences.

[claydoh]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

One thing to mention here is that Ubuntu's packaging favors apt over aptitiude, at least in Maverick, possibly in earlier versions. I think it is to make dependency resolution a bit easier, especially as aptitude will no longer be installed by default.

While it is not a very likely scenario, aptitiude can be too smart sometimes: http://kubuntuforums.net/forums/inde...opic=3113231.0
http://kubuntuforums.net/forums/inde...2730#msg232730

Here if someone accepts the proposed solutions, they would have very broken systems imo.
But as I said, this sort of situation isn't the norm. (I could not locate the thread where I remember aptitude wanting to downgrade what seemed like half of kde to a previous version)

[Adrian]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

aptitude is great for people who are able to read prompts. It solved dependencies automatically, apt-get doesn't do that, I remembering upgrading from KDE 3.5 to KDE 4 with aptitude without almost any problem. With apt-get it was a different story, it worked but it required a number of iterations to get things right.

[Ole Juul]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

aptitude is great for people who are able to read prompts. It solved dependencies automatically, apt-get doesn't do that, I remembering upgrading from KDE 3.5 to KDE 4 with aptitude without almost any problem. With apt-get it was a different story, it worked but it required a number of iterations to get things right.

Now I am thoroughly confused. Everywhere else it says that apt and aptitude both bring in dependencies. Perhaps you are mistaken. Also, I always use apt and haven't used aptitude, but does aptitude actually give you prompts? From what I've read, when used on the command line, aptitude works like apt, unless you count Y/n as a prompt, but surely everyone can read that.

I looked at most of the links provided by Rog131 and it seems that the people suggesting that aptitude is better because it autoremoves dependencies are ignoring that apt also does autoremove. What's up with that?

Edit: I just noticed that kubicle addressed the autoromove issue above, but I still wonder why others are ignoring it.

[Snowhog]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

aptitude is great for people who are able to read prompts. It solved dependencies automatically, apt-get doesn't do that,...

Not true. Running apt-get dist-upgrade handles, intelligently, package dependencies:

dist-upgrade
dist-upgrade in addition to performing the function of upgrade,
also intelligently handles changing dependencies with new versions
of packages; apt-get has a "smart" conflict resolution system, and
it will attempt to upgrade the most important packages at the
expense of less important ones if necessary. So, dist-upgrade
command may remove some packages. The /etc/apt/sources.list file
contains a list of locations from which to retrieve desired package
files. See also apt_preferences(5) for a mechanism for overriding
the general settings for individual packages.

[verndog]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

aptitude is great for people who are able to read prompts. It solved dependencies automatically, apt-get doesn't do that, I remembering upgrading from KDE 3.5 to KDE 4 with aptitude without almost any problem. With apt-get it was a different story, it worked but it required a number of iterations to get things right.

Now I am thoroughly confused. Everywhere else it says that apt and aptitude both bring in dependencies. Perhaps you are mistaken. Also, I always use apt and haven't used aptitude, but does aptitude actually give you prompts? From what I've read, when used on the command line, aptitude works like apt, unless you count Y/n as a prompt, but surely everyone can read that.

...

There are a few other prompts, if that's what he is talking about, like +/- to expand. To view sizes of dependencies.

[Adrian]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

"solves dependencies" not "bring dependencies", both brings dependencies but if you use Sid or Testing for example or add a third party repo in Kubuntu and the program doesn't install cleanly apt-get just gives up, aptitude tries and most of the times provides good solutions.

As for reading the prompts I was mainly referring to the previous post that if somebody accepted the proposed solution would have got a broken system, that doesn't happen if you actually read what aptitude (or for that matter apt-get dist-upgrade) prompts you to do.

[Adrian]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

aptitude is great for people who are able to read prompts. It solved dependencies automatically, apt-get doesn't do that,...

Not true. Running apt-get dist-upgrade handles, intelligently, package dependencies:

Really, so what you understood I said is not true? What about what I really said. Read again and see the context, I was talking about complex operation like installing KDE4 when you have KDE3.5 installed, try that with apt-get and come back and claim again that "it's not true".

[claydoh]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

it's the uber-geek souped-up, turbocharged V8 version. There is nothing wrong with it, but why include 2 different cli tools that perform the same tasks? It is still available to be installed. Hopefully this doesn't denegrate to the level of emacs/vi gnome/kde, ford/chevy , um, debates

[claydoh]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

Really, so what you understood I said is not true? What about what I really said. Read again and see the context, I was talking about complex operation like installing KDE4 when you have KDE3.5 installed, try that with apt-get and come back and claim again that "it's not true".

Well, trying that is actually something which wasn't designed to be an option in the first place (in Kubuntu). Not everyone would necessarily have the same success as you may have had.

[Snowhog]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

Hopefully this doesn't denegrate to the level of emacs/vi gnome/kde, ford/chevy , um, debates

Not here. Using apt-get dist-upgrade, for me, has never failed me. On those occasions (rare) that errors got reported, running apt-get -f install (followed by apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade sequences [as necessary]) resulted in complete upgrades. I've never had a problem.

[Ole Juul]

Re: Aptitude vs apt-get

As claydoh pointed out, different strokes for different folks. I've never liked features and always prefer elegance when I can get it. It sounds like both these programs are comparable in functionality. To me then, unless one requires unreasonable resources, it comes down whichever uses less code.