[vox-tech] Apt-get vs. Dselect

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Bob Scofield (rscofield at afes.com):

> I'm trying to do a little reading about apt-get when I have the time.  Every 
> once and awhile I see a reference to dselect.  Sometimes I get the impression 
> that apt-get has superceded dselect, and sometimes I get the impression that 
> dselect does things that apt-get doesn't.  My question is this:  is there a 
> good reason for an apt-get user to use dselect?

Here's a logical "stack" diagram that I made a long time ago, for my
"Debian Tips" collection:

    gnome-apt     ---------
    aptitude              |    Package selection
    Corel Update          |
    Storm Package Manager or
    dselect*              |
    console-apt   ------- |
       |
       | calls
       v
    apt-get          Dependency-resolution,
       |             package-retrieval
       |
       | calls
       v
     dpkg       Package installation & removal,
                configuration

*dselect _can_ use apt-get as a "method" as indicated here, but by
default does not, bypassing that layer and calling dpkg directly.

(Alternatively, skip the first category, package selection, and
just use apt-get et al. directly from the command line.  Many of
us do this by preference.)

At the time I made that diagram, I was unaware that aptitude also had a
command-line mode (or maybe it didn't have one, yet).


My point is that apt-get and dselect are tools at different levels of
abstraction.  Comparing them is like comparing carburetors with
Chevrolets -- except that carburetors by themselves aren't much use,
whereas apt-get (and aptitude's command-line mode) are.