[pacman-dev] [PATCH] Group optional dependencies by installation status

[Drew DeVault]

> You mean -Qi?   And like we already do?

Heh, whoops. You're quite right. I'd still like a second opinion on
removing optional installed packages from the output, though.

On 07/12/2013 01:17 AM, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 12/07/13 16:06, Drew DeVault wrote:
>>> What if we just did not print installed optional dependencies?
>> I'm open to that idea, but hesitant to completely remove them. Maybe we
>> can adjust the output of pacman -Si to include this status in the
>> optional dep list?
>> I'd like additional opinions for either of these changes.
>>
> You mean -Qi?   And like we already do?
>
>
>