[pacman-dev] pacman-disowned

Jeremy Heiner scalaprotractor at gmail.com
Thu Oct 3 19:48:08 EDT 2013

On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 10:38 PM, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org> wrote:
> I am very against that style of output.   I want it to be clear what the
> change is without having to decipher a code.

Like I said, the output format isn't something I've put much thought
into. The "ls -l" style is just something that is so ubiquitous that I
thought it would be easy to grok. Any suggestions for a style of
output would be great. But, perhaps, discussing output format might be
a bit premature.

The thing I want to put thinking time into right now is the use case
scenario. The motivation. Part of system maintenance should be
comparing pacman's idea of the filesystem with the actual contents of
the filesystem. And part of that is keeping an eye out for stray files
in managed dirs. I've identified check.c as the place for this as it
already iterates over the package files and mtrees. Details like
output format can be settled later. But are there any major pitfalls
here that I am just not seeing? (It certainly wouldn't be the first
time that's happened to me ;)

More information about the pacman-dev mailing list