On Sunday 25 November 2007 23:02, Aaron Konstam wrote: > On Sun, 2007-11-25 at 15:53 +0000, Chris Jones wrote: > > > I've used both. I LOVED apt. It was FAST. I mean real fast. I > > > actually preferred it to yum. It had a sweet GUI interface, and > > > searches were quick. I could use it for for bringing-in packages as > > > stated, but it worked well as a local package manager too. It was an > > > all-in-one solution. > > > > I'm with you there. APT is much faster than yum. The gui you are > > thinking of is probably synaptic, and I agree its probably the best > > package manager GUI I've used. > > Now I think we are confusing apt with apt-get. Synaptic is the apt-get > gui in Ubuntu, It is all confusing, to me at least. I use apt on Debian, and Kubuntu, and have used apt on Fedora since FC1. Going back into the mists of time, and FC1, which incidentally I still have installed on both of my machines, and still works well, though no longer supported. That aside, I was stuck with Redhats up2date on FC1. Being on dialup, and up2date not having any resume support, you can imagine what it was like trying to get updates. I found apt when looking for music apps, and found planetccrma. Apt was presented as a package manager, and I havn't looked back. Saying that though, the earlier versions of apt ran a lot faster than those that are using repometadata now. I'm comparing . apt-0.5.15cnc6-1.1.fc2.fr with apt-0.5.15lorg3.2.12.fc7 Anyway, back to apt, and apt-get. Apt is the package you install to use the Apt package manager. Apt-get is how you use it on the CLI. apt-get update will update the package lists to the latest available. apt-get upgrade, or apt-get dist-upgrade will download and install the latest packages. See man:apt-get in your browser for the differences between apt-get upgrade, and apt-get dist-upgrade. Synaptic is a GUI for apt-get, much as Yumex is a GUI for Yum. personally I prefer Synaptic as it lists all the installed packages, along with the available ones, whereas Yumex has them on 2 separate lists. Everyone to there own I suppose, but I just prefer Apt, and Synaptic. 2¢ worth of weekend ramblings. Nigel. > > > > Yum became the Fedora/RedHat standard, as I recall, due to apt not > > > being able to differenciate between architectures; i.e., if I wanted to > > > install the current *.i686.rpm kernel, apt couldn't distinguish between > > > that and a *.i386.rpm kernel. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it was a major > > > issue that prevented apt from working under Fedora correctly. > > > > I think this correct - Not only i386/i686 but more importantly multilib > > - i.e. having both the 32bit and 64 bit versions of some packages at the > > same time. That was some time ago and I do wonder if ubuntu/debian have > > not solved this by now - Surely they have a need to do the same thing > > over there ? > > > > Also, I think APT doesn't handle multiple mirrors for a single repo as > > well as yum, but I might be wrong here. > > > > cheers Chris > > -- > ======================================================================= > It is easy when we are in prosperity to give advice to the afflicted. -- > Aeschylus > ======================================================================= > Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
