On 8/25/05, Jürgen Hötzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 10:10:24AM -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote: > > 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? > > > > Yes, a captive user interface moves user interaction outside the scope of > the command interpreter. Captive user interfaces assume the the user is > human. So you needed the "yes n" hack. > > Jürgen
Yeah, I know... I can agree with that principal, but I don't mind much... hell, the kernel PKGBUILD does (used to? does it still do this?) "yes | menuconfig" What bothers me though, is the "yes" program... especially when doing "yes n"... it should be called "spam" or something... ln -s yes "spam y", ln -s no "spam n" voila! Heh _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
