[pacman-dev] [PATCH] Put not explicitly installed packages in grey during update/install/removall

[Allan McRae]

On 03/02/14 15:34, Jason St. John wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Guillaume Bouchard
> <guillaume.bouchard at liris.cnrs.fr> wrote:
>>> That colour cases the dependencies to stand out more on a terminal with
>>> a white background.  I'd say bold would be better...
>>
>> ;) I agree on that part. I guess the best idea must be to create a
>> color class for depend and for explicit so that changing it latter may
>> be easier.
>>
>>> However, the colour coding really is unclear.  How do people come into
>>> the knowledge of what it means?  For example, during an update I might
>>> think that a new package being pulled in as a dependency so it is
>>> highlighted.   Or is it entirely obvious and I am thinking too hard?
> 
> I agree that this would not be obvious to users.
> 
>>
>> You are right. Perhaps a caption, like:
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> $ sudo pacman -Su
>> :: Starting full system upgrade...
>> resolving dependencies...
>> looking for inter-conflicts...
>>
>> Packages (21): **(Explict packages appears in bold)**
>>
>> Name                              Old Version     New Version      Net
>> Change  Download Size
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Total Download Size:    154.72 MiB
>> Total Installed Size:   491.30 MiB
>> Net Upgrade Size:       -1.28 MiB
>>
>> :: Proceed with installation? [Y/n]
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> ?
>>
>> (I had never though a *so simple* hack would generate so much discussion ;)
>>
>> --
>> Guillaume
>>
> 
> I don't like the idea of a caption that says something like
> "explicitly installed packages appear in bold".
> 
> An extra column would be better than a caption, but I don't know how
> everyone feels about that...
> 
> I see three ways of doing this with a column:
> 1.) have a column title of "Explicitly Installed?" with a "yes" or
> "no" label for each package, optionally coloring the "yes" or "no"
> text for easy reading
> 2.) like the first way, but put an asterisk if the package is
> explicitly installed and leave it blank if the package is a dependency
> 3.) have a column title of "Installed..." with labels of "explicitly"
> or "as a dependency"
> 
> Of those three, I think I prefer the second method.
> 

I'm not sure there is enough room for another column - especially not
with a title that long.

Allan