On 2006-12-06, Alan McKinnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Because some equery commands search for packages (ideally >>> suited for a regex), and others by design operate on a single >>> package (where using regexes don't make any sense). >> >> But that differentiation seems purely artificial. What is >> there about the "print size" operation that makes it something >> you can't or shouldn't do on multiple packages? Why shouldn't >> the operation of "pkgspec" and "command" be orthogonal? >> "pkgspec" selects zero or more packages and the command >> operates on the selected package. > > It should, but alas it doesn't. It was coded that way. > >> Why the limitation that some commands only operate on one >> package? > > Because the dev decided to do it that way. > >> > It all makes perfect sense when you realize this, but no-one >> > expects you to realize it immediately :-) >> >> Well, it seems pretty non-intuitive and non-orthogonal to me. I >> guess that's a result of many years of shell usage where >> commands like "rm" and "ls" work equally well on a single file >> or multiple files. > > There's only one way you are going to get equery to behave > like you want - become the maintainer and code it like you > want.
I know. :) However, for most of what I want to do, the "q" utils seem much closer to the mark. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! BARBARA STANWYCK at makes me nervous!! visi.com -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list