[ubuntu-studio-users] Why recommending apt-get is obsolet - Re: Software centre not working and crashes

Ralf Mardorf ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Fri Nov 18 10:05:20 UTC 2016

Lawrence, I only wanted to inform, that from command line apt-get is not
the official Ubuntu package management tool anymore.  It is apt. For
command line gdebi is replaced by apt, too. For scripts and very old
Ubuntu releases it remains to be apt-get.

My information is not related to the GUIs.

In regards to reboots, it never is necessary to reboot, it just is
required, if a user wants to use e.g. an upgraded kernel, but actually
it's possible to continue using an old kernel, even if it was purged,
it's still in the memory. In short, yes, command line doesn't inform if
you need to reboot, simply because there is no need to reboot. If a user
expects new features that aren't available, then it's a general
troubleshooting rule to reboot. Without rebooting nothing evil could

There are reasons why Ubuntu migrated to apt and why we should start to
explain novices how to use apt, instead of apt-get.

Apart from eye-candy, there's one important apt default setting that
differs to the default setting of apt-get. By default apt doesn't keep
packages in cache. It's possible to change the default settings for apt
as well as apt-get, however, by default they don't share the same

The confusing name "dist-upgrade" was replaced by "full-upgrade".

Not only gdebi is replaced by apt, also a few dpkg commands became
unnecessary when using apt.

Recommending apt-get, gdebi and a few dpkg commands only makes sense if
we don't know what release of Ubuntu is used, or if scripts should use a
command with pipes and things like this.

If we know that somebody does use a new release of Ubuntu Studio, it's
better if Ubuntu flavour mailing lists follow common practise of Ubuntu
mailing lists, this is to explain usage of apt. As soon as the last
supported release not providing apt reaches end of life, the Wiki/help
pages should be edited, IOW apt-get should be replaced by apt.

Sure, apt-get still is safe and doesn't harm, other then the frowned
upon aptitude, it's not bad to mention apt-get. The reason to prefer
mentioning apt over apt-get is, that for the Ubuntu desktop and Ubuntu
flavours desktop main target group apt introduced more


More information about the ubuntu-studio-users mailing list