apt vs. apt-get

[dibl]

For some days I have been playing with apt and apt-get -- I have been comparing the performance of

Code Select Expand

apt-get dist-upgrade


and

Code Select Expand

apt full-upgrade


Today there was a condition on one of my systems where there was a new package to be installed, a package removal, and multiple upgraded packages. Comparing the two methods, I got identical results.  This suggests to me that I can safely move to apt for upgrading my siduction systems.  Does anyone have information to the contrary?


Thanks.

[melmarker]

it's basicly the same - only nuances differ - there is no bash-completion for apt right now and there are some switches on by default - so on can assume roughly the same behaviour.

apt upgrade = apt-get upgrade --with-new-pkgs
apt dist-upgrade = apt-get dist-upgrade

both apt  with some fancy stuff

[horo]

it's basicly the same - only nuances differ - there is no bash-completion for apt right now...

quick'n'dirty solution:

Code Select Expand

cp /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/apt-get /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/apt
In file /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/apt replace 2x apt-get and 2x apt_get with apt.

Ciao, Martin

[horo]

Hi,

and if you like you can add the string "full-upgrade" to the file apt from my posting above. (You'll see where...)

Ciao, Martin

[devil]

Apt 1.2, bound to hit Unstable tomorrow, has completion for apt. Also, using apt will from here on remove debs from /var/cache/apt/archives after the install is done (can be overriden). apt-get will keep debs, as it did up to now.


greetz
devil