• dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    These days, apt is for humans whereas apt-get is for scripts. apt’s output is designed for humans and may change between releases, whereas apt-get is guaranteed to remain consistent to avoid breaking scripts.

    apt combines several commands together. For example, you can use it to install packages from both repos and local files (e.g. apt install ./foo.deb) whereas apt-get is only for packages from repos and you’d need to use dpkg for local packages.

  • tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    apt is 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.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      mostly supersedes apt-get/apt-cache/etc tools,

      Except for in scripts. Debian guarantee that the output format of apt-get will never change and thus it’s safe to use in scripts that parse the output, whereas they don’t have the same guarantee for apt, which can change between releases.