Apt-get versus aptitude versus synaptic

[Rob Weir]

On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 10:03:30AM +0200, Erik Bågfors said
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:45:12 +1000, Rob Weir <rweir at ertius.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 12:48:54AM +0200, Jens W. Klein said
> > > R S Gill wrote:
> > > >Aptitude is a far better program I think. This is because when you
> > > >uninstall something with aptitude, it actually removes all the
> > > >dependencies that were installed with the program.  Apt-get and synaptic
> > > >do not do this. So if you try out software on  regular basis, you run
> > > >the risk of having a lot of cruft build up in your system
> > >
> > > IIRC does apt-get also remove dependencies. Sometimes some libraries are
> > 
> > No, it does not.
> 
> It does too... check this out
> 
> : [bagfors at zyrgelkwytng]$ ; sudo apt-get remove mono-jit
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> The following packages will be REMOVED:
>   blam f-spot libgconf-cil libgecko-cil libglade-cil libglib-cil libgnome-cil
>   libgtk-cil libgtksourceview-cil libvte-cil mono mono-assemblies-arch
>   mono-assemblies-base mono-jit mono-mcs mono-utils monodevelop monodoc
>   monodoc-base monodoc-browser monodoc-manual muine tomboy
> 
> So, it remove things that is dependant on the package you are
> removing. It does NOT remove packages that mono-jit depends on.  Which
> is something I think that aptitude can to to a certain degree.

Right, but the discussion was about the latter, not the former.

-rob

-- 
Words of the day:            SRI SWAT Cohiba covert video Glock Serbian warfare