On Thu Jul 30, 2020 at 7:40 PM EDT, Sebastian Jakubiak wrote:
Hello,
I would like to share my thoughts on how `pactree --optional` works.
First thing: shouldn't it omit uninstalled optional dependencies when asked to query the local database (no -s/--sync)? There was a comment by Johannes Löthberg on an earlier attempt to implement --optional:
The problem is that while it works fine for -so, when searching for local packages it should properly exclude optional dependencies that are not installed so they're not printed, rather than being printed as unresolvable.
(source: https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-contrib/2020-May/000274.html)
Vaguely recalled there being history to look into, but it slipped my mind.
So for example here:
$ pactree -d1 -o python2-urllib3 python2-urllib3 ├─python2 ├─python2-pysocks: SOCKS support [unresolvable] (optional) └─python2-pyopenssl provides python2-pyopenssl: security support (optional)
python2-pysocks should be skipped, shouldn't it?
Since the installed package already has the optdep information, I think the dependency tree should show these, listed as `[uninstalled]`.
Second: default value of DEPTH (optional argument of -o/--optional). I think that infinity (-1) would have been a better choice than 1. In other words, no depth specified should mean no depth limiting. The function of the switch could then be described like so:
--optional[=DEPTH] also list optional dependencies, optionally stopping at DEPTH
This would be kind of analogous to how 'normal' depth works -- unlimited unless --depth=N is passed. Also, it may sound silly but -o1 feels slightly easier to type if need be / looks less strange than -o-1.
Perhaps this was done to avoid flooding? As an extreme example: ~ > pactree -so-1 diffoscope | wc -l 4089 Albeit confusing, I think I like this behavior. cc Will
But I guess that other people's views on this matter might differ from mine. Plus, it is maybe too late anyway to change the behavior of the feature since a release containing it has been made. I should have raised my concerns earlier.
Not too late IMO. -- Best, Daniel https://danielcapella.com