On Jan 25, 2008 6:40 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 25, 2008 5:31 PM, eliott <eliott@cactuswax.net> wrote:
On 1/25/08, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 25, 2008 5:02 PM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
eliott schrieb:
I guess I don't see where this script fits in, and how it is supposed to be used. thomas made mention of using zgrep for advanced users, but that seems just as difficult as opening a web browser and typing into a search box.
The purpose is to provide filelists for download, so they can be searched offline by pacman. My first idea (implementing an online search in pacman) was rejected, thus I thought about a "download the filelist and search it" offline solution.
Oh, I must have misunderstood too. If you're going to implement filelist search and all that stuff, we should: a) Move this to the pacman-dev mailing list b) Add external tools to do this as part of the "pacman source", i.e. as a patch to repo-add c) Not use this script until pacman actually has this feature.
If the intent is to let users zgrep it, then I agree with cactus that that is significantly more complex then actually using the website to provide a search interface.
Yeah. I wasn't apposed to having a file search mechanism on the site. I was apposed to having pacman query the website. If a user opens up a browser and searches, no problem. It was tying this to pacman that I felt was a *really bad idea*.
Alternatively, if there is a pacman only solution, that involves some mirrored meta in the repository, that is something else entirely, and should probably be talked about on the pacman dev list, so as to make it as distribution neutral as possible.
As I've said already, I really don't think this feature belongs in pacman. Obviously you can draw the connection with the -Ql operation, and the fact that we have -Ss, but this is something a bit different than that and I see it as feature creep.
I disagree - pacman is the tool for managing local and remote collections of packages, and knowing what files are inside what packages certainly falls in that realm. I don't see how this feature is any more feature-creepish than pacman -Ql or pacman -Qo. There've been many valid use-cases suggested already, so it's not a fluff request. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't see what's so horrible about including it, aside from the fact it means we need to download more meta-info from the repos. I've skimmed through the thread, and haven't seen this yet, so I'll ask - can those who are opposed (Dan, and Jeff for instance) give reasons why you think it's improper to place this functionality inside pacman itself?