Your message dated Mon, 3 Jun 2013 08:49:49 +0800
with message-id
<CAN3veRea8GU7Z3z9Fp=7gYRimWhLpfM_5N4XWYdWCOWXDor=b...@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#710751: "why" should work on patterns
has caused the Debian Bug report #710751,
regarding "why" should work on patterns
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
710751: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=710751
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: aptitude
Version: 0.6.9.1-1
# aptitude search ~i~nblue
i bluetooth - Bluetooth support
i A bluez - Bluetooth tools and
daemons
i bluez-compat - BlueZ 3.x compatibility
binaries
i A libbluetooth3 - Library to use the BlueZ
Linux Bluetooth stack
# aptitude why ~i~nblue
E: Unable to locate package ~i~nblue
The latter should work just like
# aptitude why bluetooth bluez bluez-compat libbluetooth3
i bluetooth Suggests bluez-cups
p bluez-cups Depends cups
p cups Suggests hplip
p hplip Suggests python-notify
i python-notify Depends libgtk2.0-0 (>= 2.8.0)
i libgtk2.0-0 Suggests gvfs
i A gvfs Suggests gvfs-backends
p gvfs-backends Depends libbluetooth3 (>= 4.91)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 3 June 2013 00:29, <[email protected]> wrote:
> DH> What is the function of the non-final arguments (‘bluetooth’ …
> DH> ‘bluez-compat’) doing in this example?
>
> Erg, upon reading the man page
>
> If one or more <pattern>s are present, then aptitude will begin its
> search at these patterns; that is, the first package in the chain
> it prints will be a package matching the pattern in question. The
> patterns are considered to be package names unless they contain a
> tilde character ("~") or a question mark ("?"), in which case they
> are treated as search patterns (see the section "Search Patterns"
> in the aptitude reference manual).
>
> I have a better idea,
>
> # aptitude why ~i~nblue
> E: Unable to locate package ~i~nblue
>
> should add an additional
> E: Usage: aptitude [<options>...] {why | why-not} [<patterns>...] <package>
>
> or something, else erm... the user might think those names get expanded
> first before being handed to the rest of the machinery.
>
> Anyway at least I proved that <package> should probably be <packages>...
> on the man page.
How so? ‘<package>’ here refers to the final argument and is required
to identify exactly one package; ‘<patterns>…’ refers to the non-final
arguments that there can be any number of.
The purpose of the pattern arguments is to restrict the reasoning, not
include extra packages to reason about. To keep the command
manageable and still useful, it is not possible to support reasoning
about multiple packages at the same time.
>
> (I was trying to just "do several at once, like apt-cache", nothing fancy.)
Why does not support that, and neither is documented to. Specifying
package names instead of patterns for the non-final arguments makes it
appear it does (by including such packages in its reasonings), but it
should not be used like that because such earlier packages are only
partially reasoned about (i.e. the first pattern will be exactly the
first package listed).
There is already an open bug about perhaps improving the documentation
here. Closing this as we will not support multiple target packages in
‘why’.
Regards
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Aptitude-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aptitude-devel
