On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 07:23:23 +0100, Chris Bannister
<cbannister@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 06:04:24PM -1000, david wrote:
>> On 02/16/2013 05:10 PM, Chris Bannister wrote:
>> >Of course, if you were running a truly minimum desktop, you don't even
>> >need synaptic because apt-get is installed anyway.
>>
>> I find synaptic a much-easier way to manage packages than the
>> cryptic command lines of apt-get or dpkg. For instance, I can easily
>> see what a particular package recommends and decide if I want to
>> also include one or more the recommendations.
>
> That what "apt-cache policy <pkgname>", and "apt-cache show <pkgname>"
> are for. I don't see how you can call the command lines crptic!
>
> Also my comment was just pointing out that if you have synaptic
> installed you can't honestly claim that you have a "truly minimum
> desktop"
If you don't know the name off a program or you even don't know, if such a
program you're looking for does exist, Synaptic can be very helpful. For
such a task it's easier to use, or at least more comfortable to use.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Sun Feb 17 16:15:05 2013
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 17 2013 - 16:15:05 EET