[pacman-dev] New Optional Dependencies Aren't Logged.

[Eli Schwartz]

On 3/17/19 12:49 PM, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
>> Based on your description, this sounds like a case of "I was mildly
>> curious about something this one time
> 
> No, it would have been useful to know.  There's no need to overly weaken
> it.
> 
>> I understand the desire, but there are already tools to find what a
>> package optionally depends on and what optionally depends on a
>> package.
> 
> Have you one in mind?  It's not pactree(1), I checked that first.
> 
>> Before we start bloating every user's log with extraneous information
> 
> Point taken, though looking at pacman.log, it would be very slight
> bloat given all its existing content.

What you want is an advanced metadata crawler/formatter for the pacman
database. Simply logging it wouldn't help in the common case, as you'd
still need to compare the log info with the current state of the system
and figure out what is relevant.

Fortunately, there is just such a tool, which has only one problem --
that being, that people aren't aware of it. :p Try out the pacutils
package, specifically the paccheck program:

paccheck --recursive --quiet --opt-depends $pkg

It will list optdepends that are not fulfilled, recursively, for the
package(s) you specify, and has a lot of other helpful options as well.

-- 
Eli Schwartz
Bug Wrangler and Trusted User

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1601 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/attachments/20190317/bf2e5fbc/attachment.sig>