Prev: Update RHEL 5.1 to 5.4
Next: Running Web Servers In A Chroot Jail
From: Nico Kadel-Garcia on 18 Mar 2010 20:31
On Mar 18, 2:48 pm, Florian Diesch <die...(a)spamfence.net> wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <t...(a)invalid.invalid> writes:
>
>
>
> > John Hasler wrote:
> >> Nico Kadel-Garcia writes:
> >>> As a man who appreciates the finer features of various front ends, I'd
> >>> like to suggest that someone who claims that it's merely "personal
> >>> preference" has not had to deal with some of the less fortunate front
> >>> ends of software.
>
> >> I was referring specifically to the three Apt front-ends.  I've used
> >> Dselect (which is not based on Apt).
>
> >>> And I highly recommend Eric Raymond's article on "The Luxury of
> >>> Ignorance" for some examples of why a good front end matters, a lot,
> >>> for software.
>
> >> Of course it matters.  You injected the word "merely".  It is still
> >> personal preference: all three produce the same result.  Recall that the
> >> OP was worried that he might need to redo his installations because he
> >> had used the "wrong" front end.  Most users will prefer Synaptic because
> >> it matches their GUI experience.  However, if such a user does manage to
> >> install some packages using Apt-get they are just as installed as if she
> >> had used Synaptic.  Use the one you like best or switch around if you
> >> wish.  It'll work.  It's Debian.
>
> > Are you sure?
>
> > I got in a mess here using apt-get to install stuff, that synaptic
> > then decided 'wasn't required' and promptly removed.
>
> Are you sure that it wasn't aptitude instead of apt-get? apt-get and
> synaptic both use libapt's database of automatically installed packages
> while aptitude has it's own database for that.
>
> You can use apt-mark-sync to sync this databases.
>
>    Florian

And this sort of detail is why "front ends matter".
From: The Natural Philosopher on 18 Mar 2010 21:13
Florian Diesch wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp(a)invalid.invalid> writes:
>
>> John Hasler wrote:
>>> Nico Kadel-Garcia writes:
>>>> As a man who appreciates the finer features of various front ends, I'd
>>>> like to suggest that someone who claims that it's merely "personal
>>>> preference" has not had to deal with some of the less fortunate front
>>>> ends of software.
>>> I was referring specifically to the three Apt front-ends. I've used
>>> Dselect (which is not based on Apt).
>>>
>>>> And I highly recommend Eric Raymond's article on "The Luxury of
>>>> Ignorance" for some examples of why a good front end matters, a lot,
>>>> for software.
>>> Of course it matters. You injected the word "merely". It is still
>>> personal preference: all three produce the same result. Recall that the
>>> OP was worried that he might need to redo his installations because he
>>> had used the "wrong" front end. Most users will prefer Synaptic because
>>> it matches their GUI experience. However, if such a user does manage to
>>> install some packages using Apt-get they are just as installed as if she
>>> had used Synaptic. Use the one you like best or switch around if you
>>> wish. It'll work. It's Debian.
>> Are you sure?
>>
>> I got in a mess here using apt-get to install stuff, that synaptic
>> then decided 'wasn't required' and promptly removed.
>
> Are you sure that it wasn't aptitude instead of apt-get? apt-get and
> synaptic both use libapt's database of automatically installed packages
> while aptitude has it's own database for that.
>

never knowingly used aptitude. Might have, unwittingly.

> You can use apt-mark-sync to sync this databases.
>
Noted for future reference. Thx.
>
> Florian
From: Artist on 22 Mar 2010 03:38
John Hasler wrote:
> Artist wrote:
>> There are several installations I did using Debian apt-get before I
>> found out I really should have been using aptitude. But now that those
>> installations are done would there be any benefit to uninstalling them
>> and reinstalling using aptitude?
>
> Allodoxaphobia writes:
>> You mean you're *not* using the Synaptic Package Manager?
>
> To clarify, apt-get, aptitude, and synaptic are all front-ends for the
> apt library. Use whichever you like.

I have just made an attempt to do so.

I installed PuTTy and enabled X11 forwarding on it.

I made the SSH connection to the remote Debian OS.

Using PuTTy SSH I installed Synaptic using "apt-get install synaptic."

I installed Xming on my local Windows XP machine and it is running.

Using PuTTy SSH I executed the synaptic command on the remote Debian OS
and got the error:
(synaptic:11154): Gtk-WARNING **: cannot open display

I suspect this is due to my having not done something to connect
Synaptic to X11. I know X11 is installed because I can see its
directories and files when I execute "locate X11". I need help with
this. I do not know what to do next.

--
If you desire to respond directly remove the "sj." from the domain name
part of my email address. It is a spam jammer.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Update RHEL 5.1 to 5.4
Next: Running Web Servers In A Chroot Jail