Debian Planet

Welcome to Debian Planet


Apt-get into it.
Main Menu

  • Home

  • Topics

  • Web Links

  • Your Account

  • Submit News

  • Stats

  • Top 10

  • Debian

    These are important Debian sites one should not be without!

  • Official Debian site

  • Package search

  • Mailing list archives

  • Bug reports

  • Debian on CD

  • Unofficial woody CD ISOs

  • Unofficial APT sources

  • Developers’ Corner

    Other great Debian news sources:

  • Debian Weekly News

  • Kernel Cousin Debian

    (Debian mailing lists digested)
  • Community Groups

    Need help? You’re not alone on this planet.

  • debianHELP

    (User support site)

  • Debian International



  • EsDebian


  • DebianWorld


  • MaximumDebian


  • DebianUsers


  • Debian-BR


  • IRC

    The place to get help on a Debian problem (after reading docs) or to just chat and chill is #debian on

    Many of the Debian Planet staff live there so pop by and say hello.

    Wanna write?

    Got that latest or greatest scoop? Perhaps you have some important news for the Debian community? Submit a news item!

    Or perhaps you’ve written a rather ground breaking insight into some aspect of Debian and you feel compelled to share it with others? Knock up a longer editorial article and send it to the editors.


    DP is sponsored by Xinit Systems and

    Domains paid for and hosted by

    Buy your Debian merchandise at

    Who’s Online

    There are currently, 71 guest(s) and 3 member(s) that are online.

    You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here.


    The comments are owned by the poster. We aren’t responsible for their content.

    Re: Why must apt fall short of the mark? (Score: 1, Informative)
    by Anonymous on Friday, June 08 @ 23:55:42 BST

    This is just plain silly. Many CLI tools have optional interactivity features, dpkg itself being a good example. dpkg might ask you questions about the setup of a package, but still is used in a few zillion scripts.

    Apt could get CLI options that would make it more verbose, and possible interactive, if the current options were unchanged, and that as such, it was still possible to run it as a batch tool.

    [ Reply | Parent ]

    Re: Why must apt fall short of the mark? (Score: 1)
    by Robot101 (robot1<zero> on Saturday, June 09 @ 03:37:59 BST
    (User Info)

    You’re missing the point. Apt doesn’t even offer the /possibility/ of the suggests/recommends. I don’t see their being added will make apt any more or less interactive than it already is. The default could be to prompt seperately for recommends and skip suggests, or even to ignore both and only consider them if you turn them on in the config/command line.

    Either way, it’d give apt the ability to fulfil all requirements without needing to launch dselecy, which currently it does not, and for no good reason.

    Personally, I and I’m sure many others find dselect to be un-navigable with this many packages in unstable, and no effective way to filter them besides the overstretched sections and priorities. I use apt-cache search|show and apt-get install because of this, but that doesn’t mean I don’t want to consider recommends or suggests.


    [ Reply | Parent ]

    Re: Why must apt fall short of the mark? (Score: 1)
    by ressu ( on Saturday, June 09 @ 17:43:00 BST
    (User Info)

    how about Just showing what other packages recommend. this would satisfy a few needs.

    [ Reply | Parent ]

    Based on: PHP-Nuke

    All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2000 by Debian Planet

    You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php.