On Feb 13, 2004, at 8:48 PM, Remi Mommsen wrote:
On Feb 13, 2004, at 9:15 AM, jfm wrote:Similarly, to get the set of pkgs that eg still depend on gd a simple
egrep -rI '[, ]gd([, ]|$)' /sw/fink/dists/unstable|grep 'Depends:'
suffices with the 1 line convention.
(And as long as only a dozen pkgs don't follow that convention, it is still tolerable)
... Following your line of thought you will have to forbid the use of the here-doc structure for dependencies. Otherwise your simple grep reports an incomplete set of packages which is bad IMHO.
Sure I would prefer. But since I +/- know this dozen of pkgs, and since up to now I never had to
embed such uses of grep in longer scripts (running over all info files, eg to write a dependency tree
or something to be fed to tsort) which would have to be foolproof, the situation is still liveable for me.
And a 'f_wh' ("fink which"), to get eg the pkgs a set of given pkgs depend on
Is it really worthwhile to complicate so much such simple uses ???
I guess a functionality for printing all packages depending on a given package could be quite easily implemented in fink itself.
_as described in the first example in my previous msg...
And ...
Probably. But :
1) note that feature requests like #496468 and #535059 are since 2 years in the tracker ...
So I would rather wait till such things effectively exist before complicating life for substitutes.
2) you would want such such an implementation to be at least as efficient as the above-cited
'poor man" implementations that don't use the db. I mentioned this difference in the previously
cited msg; eg :
# time { fink info evolution|grep Maintainer ; }
Maintainer: The Gnome Core Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>real 0m51.066s user 0m8.990s sys 0m2.370s # time grep Maintainer `f_wh evolution` Maintainer: The Gnome Core Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
real 0m23.870s user 0m1.070s sys 0m2.850s
(timings are quite consistent for the second, and much more variable for the first_
but differences always are in this direction, and the above 2 are rather typical, and
were obtained running simultaneously in 2 different windows).
(And to be fair, the comparison should be with such scripts for a hypothetical
fink which would really be user-friendly in this respect _ I mean, eg have
systematically info filenames of the form %n_%v_%r.info (like debs), with no other
underscores _ so "f_wh" would just have to read a couple of dirs, no files .
Similarly all variant syntaxes allowed in info files complicate such scripts _
and the users life ..)
3) What you are suggesting amounts to construct within fink a specialized
language for querying its db. It is not always easy to design well such a
language _ to be sure to cover all reasonable desiderata with a set of
primitives as small and efficient as possible.
Is it not better just to make sure the general purpose tools are easy to use ?
Best,
Jean-Francois
------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
