BackTrack 4 update manager?

[altjx]

Is there an update manager on this? I manually installed a few programs and I know they're out of date, just trying to update them but I have no idea how to get to update manager. sudo apt-get update didn't really do anything but downloaded a few updates, not sure if it installed them or not

[lordplagueis]

Is there an update manager on this? I manually installed a few programs and I know they're out of date, just trying to update them but I have no idea how to get to update manager. sudo apt-get update didn't really do anything but downloaded a few updates, not sure if it installed them or not

apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade

[Barry]

Linux-101. There's the command line way, like lordplagueis said. There's the update manager, in the system settings. There's also the synaptic package manager in the system settings.

[roybatty]

Forget about apt-get, use aptitude instead.

Aaron Toponce : Aptitude vs Apt-Get

[xX_Spiidey_Xx]

apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade

Actually, dist-upgrade isn't really what we want, unless they're running BT4 Pre or Beta, but will work just the same.

From the manpages:
apt-get update is used to resynchronize the package index files from their sources...
apt-get upgrade is used to install the newest versions of all packages currently installed on the system from the sources enumerated in /etc/apt/sources.list.
apt-get dist-upgrade: in addition to performing the function of upgrade, also intelligently handles changing dependencies with new versions of packages; apt-get has a "smart" conflict resolution system, and it will attempt to upgrade the most important packages at the expense of less important ones if necessary.

apt-get nor aptitude will update manually installed software. What you're most likely to have to do is use dpkg with an updated package, or using dpkg with the --update-avail <Packages-file> option might work (it *should* if your packages came with update infos).

Forget about apt-get, use aptitude instead.

Aaron Toponce : Aptitude vs Apt-Get

Both apt-get and aptitude do the same thing, and use the same sources file. Perhaps you require an update?

[Archangel-Amael]

Both apt-get and aptitude do the same thing, and use the same sources file. Perhaps you require an update?

Technically and actually they are not the same. apt-get remove for one is apart of apt and it will remove packages but it can and does leave orphaned packages which is why there is deborphan.
Aptitude will not do this.

[roybatty]

Both apt-get and aptitude do the same thing, and use the same sources file. Perhaps you require an update?

True, windows and linux do the same thing too, but in a different way. Your update is made clear in the original article

Now, before I continue, I want to say that yes, I am aware of ‘apt-get autoremove’ finally being able to handle orphaned dependencies. This is a step in the right direction, for sure. However, apt-get, with its many other tools, is an okay way of doing things, if you like to learn 16 different tools. Aptitude, as I will show you, is one tool for them all.

So, I presume you didn't take the time to read it.

Let me put it another words: Debian recommends aptitude over apt-get.

ChapterÂ*2.Â*Debian package management

I kindly quote it for ya:

The Debian package management system has a rich history and many choices for the front end user program and back end archive access method to be used. Currently, we recommend aptitude(8) as the main front end program for the Debian package management activity.

[xX_Spiidey_Xx]

Technically and actually they are not the same...

Yes, I agree, and note that I was careful with my wording when I said that they do the same thing, because they do. They both install user-requested packages from the same repos listed in the same apt sources file(s). Orphaned packages aren't a problem with apt-get if you know to use apt-get autoremove packagename. But yes, I understand that the problem is knowing what to use, where aptitude would be simpler.

@ roybatty: while aptitude may be easier for noobs and casual linux users because they don't have to remember the various other options, control freaks like myself prefer to have to use 16 different commands to do 16 different things separately.

True, windows and linux do the same thing too, but in a different way. Your update is made clear in the original article... So, I presume you didn't take the time to read it.

To be honest, I skimmed it, got enough information from it to know that your source was way outdated and of little use to the OP in terms of choosing a package manager, and inserted some updated, correct material from your same source. It really doesn't matter though, the fact of the matter is that I am still correct in stating that they do the same thing - manage packages, are both based on APT, and use the same sources.

What it really boils down to is a matter of preference, one over the other. If you're a new or casual user, who isn't interested in learning multiple package management apps, use aptitude. If you're a control freak, use apt-get. There's nothing wrong with using either one or even both of them, for that matter.

This is not something worth starting a holy war over, and this is my last post on the subject in this thread.

[0m3gasw1tch]

Don't forget also to use /pentest/exploits/fasttrack/fast-track.py -i

Follow the menu options to update Metaploit, Aircrack, Nikto, etc...these won't be fully covered in apt-get or aptitude...