The binary is called apt-get. There are others like apt-cache etc.

Apt is a script that just figures out which binary to use and passes the arguments on.

• apt update -> apt-get update
• apt policy -> apt-cache policy

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.

apt is a newer, more user-friendly front-end for apt-get and apt-cache.

apt = combines commands like install, remove, update, upgrade into one tool, with prettier output

#apt-get = older, lower-level, more script-friendly For normal use, just use apt now. For scripting where 100% backward compatibility matters, use apt-get.

Following this post for replies, for a friend of course

apt-get has a fixed format machine parseable output

apts output tries to be more human readable and is subject to change

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.

🎵

APT, APT, APT, APT

Just meet me at the...

🎵

One has super cow powers, the other one doesn't.

Wait until you learn of aptitude...

Me use apt. Why use many letter when few letter do trick?

When working with RHEL I always flip a coin to see if I'm gonna use yum or dnf this time

jesus I feel old, and I am only in my 30s. I remember not having apt. How young are linux users nowadays?

How my brain distinguishes them:

apt-get when you want full verbose output

apt when you want to feel fancy with progress bars and colours

I'll just copy whatever is in the guide I'm following at the time.

I came in for the jokes but all I found was helpful responses. Did I get the Nazi virus from Reddit?

This is one of the reasons I need to set up Linux at home. I use it at work but who knows what the flavor of the week is?

At this point I can’t tell the difference between yum and rpm and apt and dnf

Use apt in the shell and use apt-get in scripts, because apt has beautiful shell output but it isn't script safe

I know about these and git and flatpaks and snaps and can definitely explain them all to you! But unfortunately, I just remembered I left my oven on...

apt is for like when you want to, and apt get is the other way to get the apt. And then if it doesn't, sudo apt will, or then sudo apt get. Like if you're just doing an apt, and then you also need to apt get, you can.

Pretty sure it's basicaly

alias apt='apt-get'

I got mistaken. See replies for explanation

=======

Apt: get whatever is in the cached package list

Apt-get: lookup the package to see the latest version and get that one

Unless you always apt update, apt-get is the go to choice for modern day Linux

There's also the apt-apt command, who triggers any audiophile to start complaining about mainstream music quality these days

Nala gang rise up!

Console chiding me every time I use apt-get out of habit because it’s deprecated now…

Me laughing in pacman

Me, I'm old, so I just keep using apt-get, because that's all we had back in the day, and I never bothered to learn what's the big deal about apt. It's just a frontend, isn't it?

It's been a long time since I've needed to use either. Instead I typically use Synaptic Package Manager, Mint's Software Manager, or gdebi. Guess I'm just a filthy casual.