Brian Masinick
@Robin; you are absolutely correct, and as a matter of fact, I generally use the full “apt-” commands, apt-get, apt-cache, and occasionally others. I don’t very often use apt-mark. If I have to get to that level to fix something, I’ll generally go all the way to the heart of the matter and use the low level dpkg command, which all of these “convenience commands” ultimately call anyway. You’re absolutely right; personally I don’t have that much use for the plain apt front end, but that’s because I’d been using other commands long before the addition of apt. I’ve never had much interest in other front ends either, such as dselect or aptitude. If I use any front end other than apt-get and apt-cache it’s usually synaptic. Where I find synaptic useful is when I’m searching; I can scroll or use a full page and see what I’m looking for a bit easier than apt-cache unless it’s something quick, then apt-cache gets the job done; that’s just me. Like any tool, some of it depends on what you’ve become familiar with. For novices I’d recommend not mixing too many front ends and certainly not stuff like adding packages one day with aptitude and another day with apt-get; that’s a good way to get package caches out of sync or causing package conflicts.
Generally speaking, apt-get, apt-cache, apt-mark, and synaptic are enough; for bigger problems it might be necessary to learn and use dpkg; most things don’t frequently require descending to the low level dpkg; that’s for experienced users only.
--
Brian Masinick
Alternate "Search B":
This search page