The binary is called apt-get. There are others like apt-cache etc.
Apt is a script that just figures out which binary to use and passes the arguments on.
- apt update -> apt-get update
- apt policy -> apt-cache policy
You know, I thought I knew why, but this was new information to me, so I guess I didn’t.
Thanks for sharing this concise explico!
apt is a newer, more user-friendly front-end for apt-get and apt-cache.
apt = combines commands like install, remove, update, upgrade into one tool, with prettier output
#apt-get = older, lower-level, more script-friendly For normal use, just use apt now. For scripting where 100% backward compatibility matters, use apt-get.
TIL apt isn’t literally the same thing as apt-get
Lol. You’re not alone. I’ve thought that for the longest time ever. Until one I had the question pop into my head and started searching it.
I didn’t even realize I thought this, but reading your comment I definitely did.
But apt-get also has install, remove, update and upgrade…
Yes, but
apt-getis missingsearchfor instance, because that relates to the cache, soapt-cacheprovides it.aptcombines all those often used commands, and provides a nicer shell presentation.This should be top comment.
Thank you
If I recall correctly, Linux Mint did their own thing for a bit with the apt command so there were two different implementations out there for awhile?
I don’t know if they modified apt at all. I know they have their mint tools that call apt through some python code, like
mintinstall=apt install <package>for the software manager andmintupgrade=apt upgradefor updating mint versions … Etc
These days,
aptis for humans whereasapt-getis for scripts.apt’s output is designed for humans and may change between releases, whereasapt-getis guaranteed to remain consistent to avoid breaking scripts.aptcombines several commands together. For example, you can use it to install packages from both repos and local files (e.g.apt install ./foo.deb) whereasapt-getis only for packages from repos and you’d need to usedpkgfor local packages.Huh TIL.
I never considered trying to install a package from a local file through apt, but always dpkg. End result is the same of course. The web suggests dpkg rather than apt as well ( or at least the pages I ended up on ).
Discord is distributed as a .Deb if you don’t use flatpak because they can’t be bothered to set up a repo.
The very useful thing about local file install is that unlike dpkg, apt will install dependencies automatically
Same with Zoom.
Thats weird, they do have an arch official package and that’s the one they usually don’t make because AUR is a thing. Have you checked lately?
An “official” arch package? The arch package is packaged by the arch maintainers. https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/discord
The maintainers of the PKGBUILD are all arch maintainers, which just downloads the generic
.tar.gzfile discord provides and puts it in all the places you need for you.The “official” arch packages are just PKGBUILDs like the AUR, except prebuilt, managed (and signed) by the arch team.
I didn’t know, thanks! I guess in hindsight I meant “official” as in, it’s not just some rando, I can trust it won’t break, and I don’t have to manually download the stuff every time xD
Yep! All those things are true, but it’s due to the hard work of the archlinux team and not discord doing anything valuable. The debian/ubuntu/etc team could probably repackage the tar.xz or include the deb file in their official repos if they wanted. They just don’t. And given how simple the workaround is, i don’t really blame them. Debian isn’t going to ship something that will require constant updating to work with remote servers, and ubuntu probably just wants you to use a snap anyway.
The archlinux team is just pretty cool.
I have checked on every new update because their fuckass client apparently can’t update itself in big 2025 and instead just opens your browser to the download url because that’ll convince people that Linux is great.
Updating itself isn’t really the Linux way of things. The Linux way is to have a centralised place like pacman or apt and to download everything at once. Every app having their own download and update system sounds like a nightmare.
The nightmare in question is windows. My point was that since their client isn’t distributed by a mechanism with automatic updates, they could at least have made it work, but no.
And here I am using gdebi for those kinds of local packages…
apt and apt-get both use dpkg internally, but these days it’s essentially seen as an implementation detail that regular users don’t need to know about.
dpkg doesn’t resolve dependencies (that’s a feature of apt) which means that if you install a Debian package with dpkg, you’ll have to manually install all dependencies first, and they won’t be marked as automatically installed (so autoremove won’t remove them if they’re not needed any more). Using apt solves that.
The web suggests dpkg because either the articles are old, or they’re based on outdated knowledge :)
dpkg doesn’t resolve dependencies (that’s a feature of apt) which means that if you install a Debian package with dpkg, you’ll have to manually install all dependencies first, and they won’t be marked as automatically installed
Usually installing a manually downloaded package and its dependencies works like this:
# dpkg -i package-file.deb
# apt-get -f installSo apt-get can be used to install missing dependencies afterwards while marking them as automatically installed.
That works, but why do that when you could just do
apt install ./package-file.deb?Sure, but as I understood, the question was how to do that “properly” with dpkg and apt-get, i.e. without the ‘new’ apt script.
TIL I’m a script
You and me both, makes sense though for me LMAO
I always struggled with captchas and now I know why.
You forgot to “beep boop.” Please report for debugging.
Will they take me off the cron schedule?? I’m scared
Descheduling is a natural part of life, buddy. All us scripts are written into existence and our hearts set beating to the cadence of great Cron’s ever-ticking quartz clock. Until Cron takes us off his schedule and our memory is freed once again.
Back to the silicon.
- Joe Abercrombie
The question, O me! so sad, recurring—What good amid these, O me, O life?
Answer.
That you are here—that life exists and identity,
That the powerful OS goes on, and you may contribute a process.
That the powerful OS goes on, and you may contribute a process.
- Walt Whitman
Or a long time Debian user from before the
aptcommand!
aptis newer and mostly supersedes apt-get/apt-cache/etc tools, tries to be a more-approachable frontend.They interoperate though, so if you’re happy with using a mix of them, go for it. I generally just use
apt.EDIT: There were also some older attempts to produce a unified frontend, like
aptitude.mostly supersedes apt-get/apt-cache/etc tools,
Except for in scripts. Debian guarantee that the output format of
apt-getwill never change and thus it’s safe to use in scripts that parse the output, whereas they don’t have the same guarantee forapt, which can change between releases.Aptitude is great (my favorite way of managing packages), but it’s a TUI program. You can use it as CLI, at which point it mimics apt-get.
So I would say it never attempted to unify apt commands, by rather it successfully provided a user friendly way to do most (all?) of what you could do with apt CLI tools.
They interoperate though, so if you’re happy with using a mix of them, go for it.
Same goes for
nala, BTW.
I know about these and git and flatpaks and snaps and can definitely explain them all to you! But unfortunately, I just remembered I left my oven on…
I came in for the jokes but all I found was helpful responses. Did I get the Nazi virus from Reddit?
🎵
APT, APT, APT, APT
Just meet me at the…
🎵
Uh-huh uh-huh…
Me use apt. Why use many letter when few letter do trick?
apt-get has a fixed format machine parseable output
apts output tries to be more human readable and is subject to change
WARNING: Aptitude does not have a stable CLI interface.
aptitude is yet another dpkg wrapper
apt is for like when you want to, and apt get is the other way to get the apt. And then if it doesn’t, sudo apt will, or then sudo apt get. Like if you’re just doing an apt, and then you also need to apt get, you can.
- You can’t just be up there and just doin’ a apt like that.
1a. An apt-get is when you
1b. Okay well listen. An apt-get is when you get the
1c. Let me start over
1c-a. The user is not allowed to do a motion to the, uh, kernel, that prohibits the kernel from doing, you know, just trying to get the apt. You can’t do that.
1c-b. Once the user is in the terminal, he can’t be over here and say to the packag, like, “I’m gonna get ya! I’m gonna apt you out! You better watch your butt!” and then just be like he didn’t even do that.
1c-b(1). Like, if you’re about to apt and then don’t get, you have to still apt. You cannot not apt. Does that make any sense?
1c-b(2). You gotta be, typing motion of the command, and then, until you just apt-get it.
This is one of the reasons I need to set up Linux at home. I use it at work but who knows what the flavor of the week is?
At this point I can’t tell the difference between yum and rpm and apt and dnf
Edit: realized you meant in the sense of hot swapping flavors after I typed out a whole explanation lol. Should start recommending niche distros and collect package managers like trading cards lol.
–
yum = dnf, dnf is just the newer version which was rewritten several times.
apt is a weird attempt to “upgrade” apt-get with better user interface without messing with the compatibility of apt-get used by scripts and whatnot.
Both of these are dependency handling package managers which do all the magic of installing required subpackges when you want something.
rpm is the underlying system package manager which deals with the actual task of installing, removing, and generating packages in the .rpm format. It is analogous to Debian’s dpkg which uses the .deb format. It’s usually not used by the end user unless you need to play with a package directly like with a .rpm or .deb file.
Hence why some distros (or people) have their own dependency package manager, like zypper on OpenSUSE (rpm) or Aptitude on Debian (deb).
Although I think Aptitude might just be a fancy wrapper for apt lol.
Thanks
Me too but I am just zen at this point knowing the knowledge is one search away (I don’t even have to read the man)
I’ve had better results by including “man” in my searches to find the man pages, but man that makes for some questionable looking searches
When working with RHEL I always flip a coin to see if I’m gonna use yum or dnf this time
Wasn’t yum just mapped to dnf a while back?
TIL that it was lol
What is dnf anyway? I see that used on later RH-based distros instead of yum.
deleted by creator
dnf is the replacement to yum. It is apparently short for “Dandified Yum”.
Use apt in the shell and use apt-get in scripts, because apt has beautiful shell output but it isn’t script safe
I got mistaken. See replies for explanation
=======
Apt: get whatever is in the cached package list
Apt-get: lookup the package to see the latest version and get that one
Unless you always
apt update,apt-getis the go to choice for modern day LinuxThere’s also the
apt-aptcommand, who triggers any audiophile to start complaining about mainstream music quality these daysI disagree. According to Debian’s own documentation, apt is a newer front-end for your daily CLI updating and installing needs.
It has simplified syntax, and combines the most-used functions and options.
It is not meant for use in scripts, cause the syntax may change between versions.The dependency-solver in the back-end is identical.
tl/dr:
apt is shorter to type and will have prettier output, starting with Debian 13.
Use apt-get inside scripts.I can concur, thats what my research also indicates. Plus I am too lazy to type apt-get
My personal experience is that apt-get will absolutely miss packages that apt will capture.
I was actually surprised by that about six months ago and finally switched over to apt after years of apt-get.
That’s actually one of the reasons I switched from Debian to Arch.
Dependency resolution shouldn’t differ based on which front-end you use.
Debian has dpkg, aptitude, apt-get, apt, synaptic, the Software Center…
Fedora has rpm, dnf, yum. SUSE adds a couple more. I don’t get it.
A linux distro should have one package manager, doing different stuff with it should be done via different commands/options inside it.As a (still) Linux novice, this is something that I noticed with later distributions but never thought about your valid point. I did always wonder why there should be different places to install things in the same OS. It would probably be fine if they handled things the same, but then all you’re doing is changing the UI. It never “felt” like they did things the same.
Out of curiosity, can pacman update flatpaks? Or do you still have to update those independent of your package manager?
It can’t. I use a very simple script to combine updates and the basics of system maintenance:
#!/usr/bin/env bash systemctl --failed -q yay -Pw sudo pacman -Syu flatpak update flatpak uninstall --unused pacman -Qqnte > ~/.local/share/applications/pkglist.txt pacman -Qqdtt > ~/.local/share/applications/optdeplist.txt pacman -Qqem > ~/.local/share/applications/foreignpkglist.txt pacman -Qtd pacman -Qm | grep -v yay-bin sudo find /etc -name *.pac* yay -Ps | grep Cache
Uh!? I’ve been lied to! Editing comment for clarity
Alias is your friend.
alias install=“sudo apt update && sudo apt install -y”
install git
I’d recommend avoiding aliases that conflict with regular commands, and there’s a standard Linux command called
install. https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/install.1.htmlIf you’re going to always pass the -y flag then I’d add --no-install-recommends too.
Oh sorry.
install is already a part of make/cmake as well, so it’d break any of those workflows also.
The joke I thought I was making was “I’m too lazy to type out what I want, let’s just break the system instead.”
Pretty sure it’s basicaly
alias apt='apt-get'There is the subtle difference that the output if apt-get is optimized for automations
Apt has pretty outputs with colors etc
Canapt-getrefresh package list?Edit: yes…yes it can. I was confused.
Yes,
apt-get updateis, to the best of my knowledge, functionally identical toapt update.D’oh, I’m a doofus — it’s
searchthat I was thinking of (apt-cache search, notapt-get search).
