Please remove Software Sources from the menus, it's destructive.
andreas at schildbach.de
Wed Feb 27 07:43:51 GMT 2008
Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote:
>> Also, "Software Sources" has more use-cases, like enabling or disabling
>> automatic security updates, selecting how often it should look for
>> updates, adding authenticaton keys and allowing statistical information
>> to be sent. This is all unlikely to need a package manager in the same
>> Personally, I'd prefer if the Software Sources would stay in the menu.
>> However, I would not mind for Synaptic to go away...
> I think you may have misunderstood. The Software Sources dialog is
> part of Synaptic. The Software Sources menu item is just an extra way
> of opening it. It saves you three mouse-clicks, granted, but it also
> leads to misunderstandings like this. Synaptic and Add/Remove serves
> two different purposes. You cannot use Add/Remove to install a single
> package, like you do in Synaptic. You also cannot install a number of
> services easily, like Mailserver, LAMP and SSH in one go, like you can
> in Synaptic. Synaptic is not comparable to Add/Remove at all,
> actually. It's competitors are the commandline tools aptitude,
> apt-get, tasksel and editing /etc/sources.list(.d) manually.
> You're a good example of why Software Sources should be removed. You
> had to learn how to use that too, but if you'd used the three extra
> mouse clicks, you would have had a better change of discovering what a
> wonderful application Synaptic is. We have to have a graphical tool
> for package management, and Synaptic does a great job.
I'm aware of the differences of the package managers. It's just that I
don't need Synaptic, whereas Software Sources is one of my most executed
administrative applications (does not matter if it's technically part of
Synaptic or not, for the user it appears as a different app).
Either I want to install an end-user application, this is what
"Add/Remove" does perfectly and IMHO more comfortable than Synaptic.
Or I want to install libraries (e.g. for development purposes) or server
processes, then I'm already at command-line level. Instructions on Wiki
pages always use "apt-get install" rather than Synaptic.
I don't want to say that Synaptic is not a good tool. It's just that it
fails to fill in a use-case of my daily Ubuntu work.
More information about the ubuntu-desktop