On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 22:10, Erich S. Morisse wrote: > I missed the beginning of this thread, so I apologize if you have > already answered this, but what about apt-get over up2date do you like > for installing new packages? I use up2date all the time for that. Well among other things the fact that if your connection drops you can recommence the download at the point you left off, which hasn't been my experience with up2date, this is especially important when downloading large packages over a dial-up link. The gnome based frontend, synaptic, makes browsing the available software easy, with the software collected into sensible categories, and newly available packages clearly marked. Up2date, in the form that it is found in RH 8.0 and 9, only really allows you to install packages that are part of the base system in their most recent form. Apt will sort out the dependencies required to install non-standard applications such as Bluefish or Rhythmbox that are provided by third parties without having to worry that installing the new package will break something currently installed. Basically what it boils down to, for me personally, is that while up2date is a great tool for installing packages that are part of the standard distro apt excels in taking the potential hassle out of installing new packages that aren't part of the distribution. It also is a boon for people on unreliable or slow connections who want to keep their system fully patched up. It also demystifies the process of installing third-party software for linux, which is always a good thing, IMO ;) -- James jamesk[at]homeric[dot]co[dot]uk There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
