Michal Pryc wrote:
> Brock,
> I have read the proposal and reviewed the needs for the GUI. It looks 
> fine. I want to ask for two more things which will be necessary.
>   
Great! Thanks for taking the time to look this over and get back to me. 
I'm glad it looks like it will satisfy your needs.
> 1. Would it be possible to add authority to the search result, so from 
> which authority the search comes. I might be wrong and maybe this is 
> already the case.
>   
Thanks for thinking of this, I'll look into making sure this information 
comes back as well. (bug 6413)
> 2. The status of the package which is the result of the search. So 
> basically if the user is looking for:
> pkg search /usr/bin/bash
> How the user will know what packages are already installed on the system 
> from the search result. The per package result call to the api could do 
> the trick, but I am not sure about costs of such call.
>   
This I'm less certain about the use of. If you do pkg search -l 
/usr/bin/bash then you'd only get hits if it was installed on your 
system. If this is a useful UI feature, I can explore it more. For the 
GUI, since there's already a source of information about package status 
else where, if it's needed for a UI interface, I think that's a better 
source of that information. If it's needed for the CLI, I'll think about 
it. With variants and facets, it becomes a more difficult question to 
answer without running the search again locally anyway since a package 
might be installed, but the action in that package which matched the 
remote search might not be installed b/c of a variant or facet.

Brock

> best
> Michal
>
> Brock Pytlik wrote:
>   
>> Michael Schuster wrote:
>>     
>>> On 01/30/09 13:05, Brock Pytlik wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Michael Schuster wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> 1) I see you mixing short and long options. Is that necessary?
>>>>>           
>>>> There are a limited number of letters, and a lot of pkg subcommands.
>>>> To attempt to reduce conflicts, I used long options for rare options.
>>>> Mostly, I closed my eyes and picked the first letter/string which
>>>> came to mind, I didn't put much thought into the option format at this.
>>>>         
>>>>> 2) if you need an option to limit the number of results, I see -n as
>>>>> the more obvious than -z.
>>>>>           
>>>> -n has meanings in other contexts. I don't care what letter is
>>>> chosen, I chose -z for size
>>>>         
>>> do you mean "pkg search -n" is already taken, or that "pkg -n ..." is
>>> taken?
>>>       
>> I mean pkg install -n, pkg uninstall -n, etc already have defined
>> meanings, and fairly important ones. I'm hesitant to create competing
>> associations in the users mind for that particular option.
>>     
>>>>> 3) the syntax for "find everything in /usr/bin" seems rather
>>>>> complex. From a previous discussion on this subject, shouldn't "pkg
>>>>> search /usr/bin" be able to "do the right thing" (since /usr/bin
>>>>> traditionally contains only files ... ;-)
>>>>>           
>>>> Well, pkg search /usr/bin/* "does the right thing".
>>>>         
>>> are you considering shell globbing effects here, or just using
>>> unquoted notation for simplicity of this exchange?
>>>       
>> Using the unquoted notation for simplicity. I can't really control the
>> shell globbing effects, and I think that defining our own '*' is
>> probably not the way to go. If there's an alternative, I'd love to hear it.
>>     
>>>>> 4) the expression syntax for and/or'ing stuff is ... ahem ...
>>>>> different from any other Solaris utility I know. Other precent to
>>>>> look at: find(1), snoop(1M), eg.
>>>>>           
>>>> Well, from what I saw from glancing at the find man page, I didn't
>>>> see provisions for AND or OR, I only saw an implicit AND.
>>>>         
>>> expression -o expression. (including grouping with "()" - all very
>>> messy with shell escapes, etc.)
>>>
>>> I'm not saying it's ideal, but many unix people know it - it has been
>>> around for some time, after all ;-)
>>>       
>> Unless I hear a large outcry, I don't think I'll be offering the -o
>> expression to mean "or". Especially not considering that -o may be an
>> option (a la pkg contents) to allow fine grained control over the output
>> categories. I think googlisms are a more reasonable style to take hints
>> from, especially given our goal of targeting a broader class of users.
>> Like I said, if there's a large outcry, I'll reconsider.
>>
>> Brock
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkg-discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> pkg-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
>   

_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to