On Jan 25, 2008 6:40 PM, Dan McGee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 25, 2008 5:31 PM, eliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 1/25/08, Aaron Griffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Jan 25, 2008 5:02 PM, Thomas Bächler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > eliott schrieb: > > > > > I guess I don't see where this script fits in, and how it is supposed > > > > > to be used. > > > > > thomas made mention of using zgrep for advanced users, but that seems > > > > > just as difficult as opening a web browser and typing into a search > > > > > box. > > > > > > > > The purpose is to provide filelists for download, so they can be > > > > searched offline by pacman. > > > > My first idea (implementing an online search in pacman) was rejected, > > > > thus I thought about a "download the filelist and search it" offline > > > > solution. > > > > > > Oh, I must have misunderstood too. If you're going to implement > > > filelist search and all that stuff, we should: > > > a) Move this to the pacman-dev mailing list > > > b) Add external tools to do this as part of the "pacman source", i.e. > > > as a patch to repo-add > > > c) Not use this script until pacman actually has this feature. > > > > > > If the intent is to let users zgrep it, then I agree with cactus that > > > that is significantly more complex then actually using the website to > > > provide a search interface. > > > > Yeah. I wasn't apposed to having a file search mechanism on the site. > > I was apposed to having pacman query the website. If a user opens up a > > browser and searches, no problem. It was tying this to pacman that I > > felt was a *really bad idea*. > > > > Alternatively, if there is a pacman only solution, that involves some > > mirrored meta in the repository, that is something else entirely, and > > should probably be talked about on the pacman dev list, so as to make > > it as distribution neutral as possible. > > As I've said already, I really don't think this feature belongs in > pacman. Obviously you can draw the connection with the -Ql operation, > and the fact that we have -Ss, but this is something a bit different > than that and I see it as feature creep.
I disagree - pacman is the tool for managing local and remote collections of packages, and knowing what files are inside what packages certainly falls in that realm. I don't see how this feature is any more feature-creepish than pacman -Ql or pacman -Qo. There've been many valid use-cases suggested already, so it's not a fluff request. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't see what's so horrible about including it, aside from the fact it means we need to download more meta-info from the repos. I've skimmed through the thread, and haven't seen this yet, so I'll ask - can those who are opposed (Dan, and Jeff for instance) give reasons why you think it's improper to place this functionality inside pacman itself?
