On Wed 03 Jan 2018 at 19:10:03 -0600, David Wright wrote: > On Wed 03 Jan 2018 at 19:33:28 (-0500), bw wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 3 Jan 2018, Felix Miata wrote: > > > > > > > > How did *you* figure out to try apt-cache _pkgnames_ to get a search to > > > include > > > packages' versions? > > > > well, see that's the thing. In debian, kernel packagenames include > > the arch and ver in them. This wouldn't work for mc for instance or other > > packages. > > > > The criticism about the different apt commands is a good one. I think the > > idea is to merge some of them into just 'apt' but so far all we have is > > show and search, shortcuts for apt-cache. > > s/merge/include/
apt also includes depends, rdepends and policy in its repertoire. > The reason some of us continue to use apt-foo and would like > continued support for them is that they are stable in what > they do and what they output. apt serves the needs of many users but it is very unlikely that support for apt-foo would diminish. > This is not meant as a criticism of apt/aptitude, but because > it's difficult to script a moving target. I've never used aptitude, but its searching abilities have been promoted to be superior to apt-cache. Whether those capabilities could be rolled into apt (or whether it is desirable to do so) I do not know. -- Brian.