This is why I like your show. There are a thousand things that I mean to look onto, and don't. The difference between apt and apt get is one; I see it, mean to study it, on forget it. Your show did it and at the right depth. Thanks
I'm surprised there has not been mention of "&&" for example the first thing i do when i start a Terminal Session on my Kali VM is: apt-get update && apt-get upgrade with the -y trigger to keep it going with the YES/NO questions. Shannon HUGE FAN! and i enjoy all the shows.
It should only hold a lock if it is left open, pushed to background via CRTL-Z, or if it died in the middle of package installation. (I've had more issues with apt-get imploding with broken dependencies, most of that goes away with updates or fixing branch locations when things get migrated in repositories)
AmirAli Tn how do you manage to do that? I uses apt(8) with cli and when doing more advanced stuff, I start aptitude(8) in full screen text meny mode (start with aptitude(8) without arguments, remember q, +, - and _ commands)
A.U.B. is an abbreviation for 'alstublieft'. In this context it means 'please', in the context of handing something to someone it means 'here you go'. For the curious. Fully translated, and keeping to the imperative style, the sticker says: "Don't poop here, please."
OK, I just tried "apt" on my OpenSuSE 42.2 box and apt is just NOT there. Oddly, I am not surprised. For those who may not know, "zypper" does the same as "apt-get" or "yum". Likewise, I tried it on my CentOS 7 box with similar results, also no surprise.
Is apt somehow related to aptitude on debian ? It has same command options almost the same output look. The difference is that apt has super cow powers, aptitude doesn't.
She actually answers this question on english stackexchange, question 191807. TL;dr: "I grew up in a military family, so this was used regularly when speaking of a dash. Without getting into details, my father was in many fields where he was required to spell out commands via a speaking system, and they used tac. "
Ooh.. the update script went from: sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade -y to: sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade -y Thanks for the 11 byte saving! :D Not sure if the -y is needed but didn't get confirmation dialog in apt, so it worked? Maybe?
wait when you pressed y on the Y/n isnt that useless. its not a capital y so its as if you typed any other letter and pressed enter it just runs the default capital choice. thats why if you type the lower case or the capital options it instantly executes
Aptitude works the best in complex dependency resolution sets where you have what seems like a billions layers of recursive dependencies. I find it works in the situations where apt-get implodes with a short list of packages.
turd sandwich aptitude(8) are like apt-get(8), but more modern cli and with a gui (terminal gui). They are all build on top of libapt. But I will probably switch to aptitude(8) and apt(8) and drop my use of apt-get(8).
Don Hill and there comes a rpm comment where someone talks about apt based distributions. Post that on your own channel or at least ask without assuming all are interested in rpm systems, to use your rethorics. Sorry for stepping on your toes now.
apt-rpm doesn't work well with other rpm package managers, from what I can tell. Wikipedia lists 4 distros which apparently still use apt-rpm, pclinuxos being one of them. If you really wanted apt with rpm packages, that's probably the easiest way to go. Otherwise you're basically doing surgery on your os, have fun ;)
RedHat distros not having apt(8) and the users first comittment from developers are the two reasons rpm based distros are not a choice for me. But obviously YMMV.
A small note in passing... apt did not just arrive, apt has been around since about 1992. Debian has used apt as its package manager since day one. What has just arrived, was they looked at some of the enhancements that apt-get had, and asked "Well why couldn't we do that?" The answer was people shuffling their desert boots while looking at the carpet, so they went and added some some the front end stuff apt-get has done for years. All apt-get is or ever was, was a front end / request handler for apt. The very fact it exists should have told apt to clean their act up in about 2005....
Not sure as to why you would not want to do an "su -" from your user shell and just become 'root'. To me, if you are intending to do some serious maintenance work it requires fewer key strokes. Granted, I was introduce to UNIX back in August of 1987 - an LINUX is not quite UNIX. Here at home (I am now retired) I do most of my stuff on a 27" iMac. I do have on Ubuntu system but do most of my 'playing' on a FreeBSD system. For programming, I still prefer plain old 'C'. Take care young lady - de N3GAQ.
mike klaene maybe because the sudo command makes it into your history. It is easier to track what have been done. You might run more stuff as a plain user and not as root, which is a good thing. Here "sudo !!" is your friend, as you know. There are plenty of reasons beginners should use sudo(8) instead of su(8). But if you know what you do, or as most people who claim but doesn't, then please use su(8).
Ubuntu based systems have this weird thing where by default, the root user has no password. The only way to su to root is to do a 'sudo su' (unless you add yourself to the wheel group). Here's one reason you might not want to use sudo: it is a somewhat more complicated suid program with more of a history of vulnerabilities. If I were building a hardened server I would consider leaving it off. 'su -c "$@"'' But sudo does make sense, and if you use it you don't necessarily have to remember a separate password for root (or reuse a password).
There are a good reason to not have an unlocked root account with password. Set up a web server to the Internet, or open up ssh server, then look at the logs. A bit scary... And you can use sudo with a switch instead of sudo su. Or try sudo bash - - login Or actually use the manual to look that up, I don't remember myself. :-) man sudo Yes, if you share administration, you don't need to share root passwords. And that is usually the case in professional sites. You just add the administrator account to sudo group. And then it is possible to trace commands, to larm on strange usage.
Yeah I've seen the logs, at least for ssh ;) I'm not saying you shouldn't use sudo, to be clear. I am saying that sudo is a potential path to root for an attacker who already has a shell on a system (from crash bugs, or from just already having your password). So there are certain use cases where you could consider leaving it off, as a hardening technique. I actually like sudo btw. One thing I do with it is launch Firefox as a less privileged user (nopasswd), which can't read my .ssh folder or put a network interface in promiscuous mode, etc (sudo -u ff-$USER).
Ok, that looks ok. But by demanding user password when entering sudo(8) commands you are migrated the problems you mention. By adding password to root, you are opening another path into your machine if it is has an internet access. Which isn't hardening your installation. That is, you add a know account, so they can guess password of known user account. That is why you should for instance remove user pi in Raspbian installations. Smart thing to do with sudo(8) and firefox(1). Might take that up. :-) Just to warn others, do not run GUI as root, especially not web browsers that surf internet.
Interesting, for me if I run apt without sudo, it runs sudo for me whenever it needs it. I've never really used apt or aptitude, as apt-get is too much of a habit for me, but I might as well play around with it while I have an Ubuntu derivative to update, right?
![OhGeesy x Lefty Gunplay - What It Iz [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/L0yzW9t2ixk/mqdefault.jpg)
As always you are providing a nice bridge from novice to super geeky! Love it!
Daniel Jones thanks!
This is why I like your show. There are a thousand things that I mean to look onto, and don't. The difference between apt and apt get is one; I see it, mean to study it, on forget it. Your show did it and at the right depth. Thanks
I'm surprised there has not been mention of "&&" for example the first thing i do when i start a Terminal Session on my Kali VM is:
apt-get update && apt-get upgrade with the -y trigger to keep it going with the YES/NO questions.
Shannon HUGE FAN! and i enjoy all the shows.
thank you.
Still using good ol' aptitude...
Thank you Shannon for another episode. Filming this one on your own rather than with two men... Funny gif that was.
Every time I used aptitude it fucked my cache up and messed up the lock. Don't know how people love it.
It should only hold a lock if it is left open, pushed to background via CRTL-Z, or if it died in the middle of package installation. (I've had more issues with apt-get imploding with broken dependencies, most of that goes away with updates or fixing branch locations when things get migrated in repositories)
AmirAli Tn how do you manage to do that?
I uses apt(8) with cli and when doing more advanced stuff, I start aptitude(8) in full screen text meny mode (start with aptitude(8) without arguments, remember q, +, - and _ commands)
HIER NIET POEPEN A.U.B.
I wasn't gonna do it, but now I am considering it.
What does the AUB stand for?
A.U.B. is an abbreviation for 'alstublieft'. In this context it means 'please', in the context of handing something to someone it means 'here you go'.
For the curious. Fully translated, and keeping to the imperative style, the sticker says: "Don't poop here, please."
Thanx a lot :)
You don't need sudo to search in apt or apt-get
Or to list updates found, either.
mhh.. my machine needs sudo for me to download ANY software, even updates, don't know what uses apt/ apt-get other than that.
Use sudo anywhere, its good habits
Thank you Shannon! Awesome tips as always.
Where did you get that shirt ;-;
yeah it's great
First Last a store called box lunch in San Francisco. I think there's an online one.
I used *apt-get autoremove* in the period where *apt autoremove* wasn't implemented.
Otherwise, i mainly use *apt [option]* to get things done. :-)
Loool, that Dutch sticker on the background xD
Awesome info. They should have called it it apt-super!
dev : a 1 color, 1 backspace
linux user : look at how nice that look !
Apt all the way, love the additional feedback from it.
OK, I just tried "apt" on my OpenSuSE 42.2 box and apt is just NOT there. Oddly, I am not surprised. For those who may not know, "zypper" does the same as "apt-get" or "yum". Likewise, I tried it on my CentOS 7 box with similar results, also no surprise.
Why didn't they just gave it another name? It's annoying. I thought they were the same and it's hard to remind myself since I barely use Ubuntu
Hi ma'am I found problem when trying update &upgrade my Kali Linux 2018 don't give me any thing
Hey Hak5 im a hacker beginner and im interested in it.So im soon going to gymnasium and which subject should i choose ex.Programming or?
Is apt somehow related to aptitude on debian ? It has same command options almost the same output look. The difference is that apt has super cow powers, aptitude doesn't.
Yaay Shannon, Thanks:)
Another informative video, but why do you call the dash character "-" tac?
She actually answers this question on english stackexchange, question 191807.
TL;dr: "I grew up in a military family, so this was used regularly when speaking of a dash. Without getting into details, my father was in many fields where he was required to spell out commands via a speaking system, and they used tac. "
Ooh.. the update script went from:
sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade -y
to:
sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade -y
Thanks for the 11 byte saving! :D
Not sure if the -y is needed but didn't get confirmation dialog in apt, so it worked? Maybe?
Reminds me of Code Golf Stack Exchange... But it does have a nicer interface.
Mac/au it IS more to it than you suggested.
How so?
wait when you pressed y on the Y/n isnt that useless. its not a capital y so its as if you typed any other letter and pressed enter it just runs the default capital choice. thats why if you type the lower case or the capital options it instantly executes
The capital Y highlights the default choice should you just hit enter at the prompt. If it was capital N, the default would be no.
Mac/au I think you should try to type a capital Y in that prompt and what happens when you just press enter
'pacman -S' ftw, with added Arch Strike repository for the winwin
lol ;)
i used sudo apt install neofetch on my fedora machine and did work
Well presented
i like your presentation i really wish we could be friends on RUclips. make similar Tech content
"HIER NIET POEPEN A.U.B", it says on a sticker on the wall, which translates to "PLEASE DO NOT CRAP HERE"
Beautiful!
APT rocks .. but still dont like the stupid side bar on ubuntu (i only use kali anyway :-))
Awesome thank you.
can you put apt or apt-get on manjaro? plz reply
nope.
Things like searching don't require sudo
I still use aptitude
Aptitude works the best in complex dependency resolution sets where you have what seems like a billions layers of recursive dependencies. I find it works in the situations where apt-get implodes with a short list of packages.
Hand Banana had no idea that there was any real difference between them I just liked the "aptitude search" command
turd sandwich aptitude(8) are like apt-get(8), but more modern cli and with a gui (terminal gui).
They are all build on top of libapt.
But I will probably switch to aptitude(8) and apt(8) and drop my use of apt-get(8).
I do apt-get upgrade -y, how I do with apt?
Pretty simple: apt upgrade -y
I guess we are assuming everyone is on Debian, how about yum(centos) and zypper on suse
Don Hill and there comes a rpm comment where someone talks about apt based distributions.
Post that on your own channel or at least ask without assuming all are interested in rpm systems, to use your rethorics. Sorry for stepping on your toes now.
apt has been around for many years. Maybe in Ubuntu for only 3 years.
Thank you!!!
yes it is the same in debian and linux mint, this i can confirm as reality, any other distro like fedora as you askt. i dunno.
For RedHat distros you have to use apt-rpm: superuser.com/questions/479850/can-apt-get-be-used-on-red-hat-systems
Joshua Pritt thanks for sharing
Joshua Pritt why not just use yum or what's replacing it, dnf?
apt-rpm doesn't work well with other rpm package managers, from what I can tell. Wikipedia lists 4 distros which apparently still use apt-rpm, pclinuxos being one of them. If you really wanted apt with rpm packages, that's probably the easiest way to go. Otherwise you're basically doing surgery on your os, have fun ;)
RedHat distros not having apt(8) and the users first comittment from developers are the two reasons rpm based distros are not a choice for me.
But obviously YMMV.
it's all about that yaourt
After moving to arch, no distro is good enough anymore...
fact of life lol :)
come see the light and join pacaur
nah mate, pacaur is way better.
MrDeejayjfx i got to try pacaur... Never hear about it...
i used to tell people that i stopped watching tv because of ads and now youtube ....
i am using APT as i always been
does this work well over SSH?
Xoa Online Works fine for me, using Putty of course
Xoa Online:
Of course it does. Why wouldn't it?
Haakon Reppen works with any SSH client. ;-)
Bitbucket is a blast!!!
A small note in passing... apt did not just arrive, apt has been around since about 1992. Debian has used apt as its package manager since day one. What has just arrived, was they looked at some of the enhancements that apt-get had, and asked "Well why couldn't we do that?" The answer was people shuffling their desert boots while looking at the carpet, so they went and added some some the front end stuff apt-get has done for years.
All apt-get is or ever was, was a front end / request handler for apt. The very fact it exists should have told apt to clean their act up in about 2005....
Hahaha...! The sticker "hier niet poepen a.u.b".
Your internet connection is so slow
Like that shirt
BashBunny plz
and aptitude
didnt have any idea about that, you are my woman :-D
I caught that. You said Bitfuckit. ;^)
I was faster than you with subscribe thing.
sudo pacman -S getallthethings
apt or yaourt for me.
Not sure as to why you would not want to do an "su -" from your user shell and just become 'root'. To me, if you are intending to do some serious maintenance work it requires fewer key strokes.
Granted, I was introduce to UNIX back in August of 1987 - an LINUX is not quite UNIX. Here at home (I am now retired) I do most of my stuff on a 27" iMac. I do have on Ubuntu system but do most of my 'playing' on a FreeBSD system. For programming, I still prefer plain old 'C'. Take care young lady - de N3GAQ.
mike klaene maybe because the sudo command makes it into your history. It is easier to track what have been done. You might run more stuff as a plain user and not as root, which is a good thing. Here "sudo !!" is your friend, as you know.
There are plenty of reasons beginners should use sudo(8) instead of su(8). But if you know what you do, or as most people who claim but doesn't, then please use su(8).
Ubuntu based systems have this weird thing where by default, the root user has no password. The only way to su to root is to do a 'sudo su' (unless you add yourself to the wheel group).
Here's one reason you might not want to use sudo: it is a somewhat more complicated suid program with more of a history of vulnerabilities. If I were building a hardened server I would consider leaving it off. 'su -c "$@"''
But sudo does make sense, and if you use it you don't necessarily have to remember a separate password for root (or reuse a password).
There are a good reason to not have an unlocked root account with password.
Set up a web server to the Internet, or open up ssh server, then look at the logs.
A bit scary...
And you can use sudo with a switch instead of sudo su.
Or try
sudo bash - - login
Or actually use the manual to look that up, I don't remember myself. :-)
man sudo
Yes, if you share administration, you don't need to share root passwords. And that is usually the case in professional sites.
You just add the administrator account to sudo group.
And then it is possible to trace commands, to larm on strange usage.
Yeah I've seen the logs, at least for ssh ;)
I'm not saying you shouldn't use sudo, to be clear. I am saying that sudo is a potential path to root for an attacker who already has a shell on a system (from crash bugs, or from just already having your password). So there are certain use cases where you could consider leaving it off, as a hardening technique.
I actually like sudo btw. One thing I do with it is launch Firefox as a less privileged user (nopasswd), which can't read my .ssh folder or put a network interface in promiscuous mode, etc (sudo -u ff-$USER).
Ok, that looks ok.
But by demanding user password when entering sudo(8) commands you are migrated the problems you mention.
By adding password to root, you are opening another path into your machine if it is has an internet access. Which isn't hardening your installation. That is, you add a know account, so they can guess password of known user account.
That is why you should for instance remove user pi in Raspbian installations.
Smart thing to do with sudo(8) and firefox(1). Might take that up. :-)
Just to warn others, do not run GUI as root, especially not web browsers that surf internet.
i use pacman, really easy
i love u
Just use aptitude
ln -s ditdah-ditdahdahdit-dah apt
I need that tshirt but im a manly man. wat do?
Hi, ummm yes, so pacman or yaourt.
Believe this is was ready covered in Hak5 snubs
What is linux?
Bitbucket... hahahaha
first like
Kap'n Kronos I had the first comment;)
"for starters" new drinking game?
awww, i felt un love with you
WTF are you guys doing? what about the bash bunny?
Interesting, for me if I run apt without sudo, it runs sudo for me whenever it needs it. I've never really used apt or aptitude, as apt-get is too much of a habit for me, but I might as well play around with it while I have an Ubuntu derivative to update, right?
Many commands to apt, apt-get etc doesn't need root privileges.
But does apt that? Don't think I like that much...
I was just pointing out an unusual behavior of apt. Although, I've made some shell scripts that do the same thing before.