On 8/25/05, Jürgen Hötzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 05:02:30PM -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote: > > On 8/23/05, eliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Yum has the following feature: > > > > > > "check-update > > > Implemented so you could know if your machine had any updates that > > > needed > > > to be applied without running it interactively. > > > Returns exit value of 100 if there are packages available for an update. > > > Also returns a list of the pkgs to be updated in list format. > > > Returns > > > 0 when no packages are available for update." > > > > > > I would like to see something similar for pacman. It seems kind of a > > > kludge > > > to pipe an N to pacman's output, then try interpreting the results..or > > > worse..trying to use expect to supply an N to an update. > > > > > > Something like 'pacman -Sy --check-only' would be very nice. > > > > > > Are there other solutions than the ones listed? Does this seem like a > > > reasonable feature request to anyone > > > else? > > > > > > Much to dibble's regret... (heh), here ya go: > > > > yes n | pacman -Syu | grep "Total Package Size" | cut -d: -f2 | tr -d \ > > > Nice hack. But also a good example of UNIX philosophy's "avoid captive user > interface" tenet, which pacman doesn't adopt in this case. > > Jürgen
captive user interface? as in requiring user interaction? _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
