On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:16 AM, Xyne<xyne@archlinux.ca> wrote:
--print-pkg and --print-uris looks good to me
but would you keep your new feature on top of these two options : --print-pkg and --print-uris only show non-download packages --print-pkg --print-pkg and --print-uris --print-uris show all ?
an alternative : what if we added the download size when ShowSize is used?
pacman -Sp fontconfig ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/extra/os/i686/fontconfig-2.4.2-1.pkg.tar.gz [1234] pacman -Spq fontconfig ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/extra/os/i686/fontconfig-2.4.2-1.pkg.tar.gz
pacman -Sp ... | grep -v "\[0\]" | cut -d' ' -f1 ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/extra/os/i686/fontconfig-2.4.2-1.pkg.tar.gz
I'm trying to follow this right now but I haven't understood what "non-download packages" vs "all" means. Can someone please refer me to the discussion about this? I tried grepping the list but didn't find anything.
it just means package already downloaded, so packages for which the download size is 0.
Instead of adding several options, wouldn't it be possible to let "-p" accept a string argument with formatting information similar to the way the date command works. This would be extensible in the future and could include the following interpretted sequences (among others)
%u - url %n - pkgname %v - pkgver-pkgrel %s - size
I don't know how difficult it would be to code but that seems the most elegant to me, rather than hardcoding the output format and having to worry about extensibility and breakage in the future.
This might not make sense though in terms of "non-download" vs "all" but as pointed out, "-yy" and "-cc" mean "all", so "-pp" should too. I'm not sure how the double flag would work with accepting an argument. Maybe there should be an additional argument "--print-format" which accepts the string, but then we're back to extra argument silliness again (although that would enable "-p" to easily default to printing URLs).
As far as backwards compatibility with "--print-uris" goes, I would suggest breaking it if a better solution is found. Holding back better design because people can't slightly modify a few simple scripts is not a valid justification imho.
hmm I think I like all these suggestions, I will give it a try :) It should indeed not break too much all scripts using -Sp. They might just need to switch to -Spp if they want all packages. and for a different output one could use -Sp or -Spp with an additional --print-format '%n' (then probably -p --print-uris needs to be renamed to -p --print)