this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2025
55 points (96.6% liked)
Linux
13338 readers
393 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes but apt-get isn't a seperate package from apt, just a seperate command. All of the apt-* commands are part of the same package, which is now Apt-3.0. This isn't really what the user above you was asking.
I honestly don't understand why use apt anywhere. Why don't always use apt-get so everything's consistent and you don't have to keep two apis for the same job on your head?
All well and good, but that doesn't cover "better". Does this mean apt-get et. al. were improved, or just apt? Where's the documentation for this "improvement"?
Hence my question.
Never knew that! Always wondered what this apt-get was, supposed it was some older alias or something
It kind of is. For a very long time it was the only option.