[pacman-dev] Output questions
I have a few pending questions about the current output that I'd like to get some opinions on. Firstly, the spacing in -Ss output - there is an extra newline after each package. This was added a while back upon request, and i personally like it, but it makes the output real huge. Looks like the options are: * Keep the line (-Ss output) * Remove the line (-Qs output) * Add the line between repositories only. Secondly, we have an interesting -Ss "issue" here: $ pacman -Ss ^kernel26$ This should only output (duh) kernel26. However, it also displays kernel26beyond. This is because -Ss ALSO searches the provides=() entries for each package... this is a bit misleading. The options are as follows: * Keep this search and indicate, somewhere, that the package was matched due to a provides=() entry * Don't search provides=() at all So, I'd like some opinions on these two topics... there's probably more somewhere, but I can't think of any.
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 10:19 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:
I have a few pending questions about the current output that I'd like to get some opinions on.
Firstly, the spacing in -Ss output - there is an extra newline after each package. This was added a while back upon request, and i personally like it, but it makes the output real huge.
Looks like the options are: * Keep the line (-Ss output) * Remove the line (-Qs output) * Add the line between repositories only.
I have no preference here.
Secondly, we have an interesting -Ss "issue" here: $ pacman -Ss ^kernel26$
This should only output (duh) kernel26. However, it also displays kernel26beyond. This is because -Ss ALSO searches the provides=() entries for each package... this is a bit misleading.
The options are as follows: * Keep this search and indicate, somewhere, that the package was matched due to a provides=() entry * Don't search provides=() at all
or: 3) Don't search provides with -Ss, but add another option for searching provides. Dale
2007/1/24, Dale Blount
On Wed, 2007-01-24 at 10:19 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:
I have a few pending questions about the current output that I'd like to get some opinions on.
Firstly, the spacing in -Ss output - there is an extra newline after each package. This was added a while back upon request, and i personally like it, but it makes the output real huge.
Looks like the options are: * Keep the line (-Ss output) * Remove the line (-Qs output) * Add the line between repositories only.
I have no preference here.
It doesn't matter much for me, but IMHO it would be better to have -Ss and -Qs with the same look.
Secondly, we have an interesting -Ss "issue" here: $ pacman -Ss ^kernel26$
This should only output (duh) kernel26. However, it also displays kernel26beyond. This is because -Ss ALSO searches the provides=() entries for each package... this is a bit misleading.
The options are as follows: * Keep this search and indicate, somewhere, that the package was matched due to a provides=() entry * Don't search provides=() at all
or: 3) Don't search provides with -Ss, but add another option for searching provides.
Also, in the previous discussion about this there was a mention of adding a reason to packages that were matched because of provides. I like Dale's idea though. I don't think pacman has too much options, so some new option won't hurt IMHO. However there's no need to make all options single-char, something like -Ss --provides will be enough, IMHO. -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
I like the idea of possibly pointing out that it is a provides with -Ss, maybe like: $ pacman -Ss ^kernel26$ current/kernel26..... .... extra/kernel26beyond.... (provides) ..... ~ Jamie / yankees26
On 1/24/07, Aaron Griffin
I have a few pending questions about the current output that I'd like to get some opinions on.
Firstly, the spacing in -Ss output - there is an extra newline after each package. This was added a while back upon request, and i personally like it, but it makes the output real huge.
Looks like the options are: * Keep the line (-Ss output) * Remove the line (-Qs output) * Add the line between repositories only.
Any firm opinions here? I guess I'd say remove it because the output gets so big when more than 5 or so packages are matched. But I don't want to make the wrong call. Let me know and I'll patch it up to at least be consistent in the next few days.
The options are as follows: * Keep this search and indicate, somewhere, that the package was matched due to a provides=() entry * Don't search provides=() at all
* OR Dale's suggestion- seperate --provides search flag (e.g. -Ss --provides) and we could even add --depends, etc. I say option 1 - indicate that it matched provides somewhere in the output. I don't know if query search works the same way, but if it does, that will get changed too. If anyone else wants to give input, now's your chance. -Dan
2007/1/31, Dan McGee
* OR Dale's suggestion- seperate --provides search flag (e.g. -Ss --provides) and we could even add --depends, etc.
Again, --depends will result in "reverse depends" feature, so it would be better implement it as standalone feature, IMO. And that feature would be cool. :) -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
participants (5)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Dale Blount
-
Dan McGee
-
James Rosten
-
Roman Kyrylych