On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 03:14:00PM -0200, Denis Alessandro Altoe Falqueto wrote:
> On 1/10/07, RedShift <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Fabiano Furtado Pessoa Coelho wrote:
> > > On 1/10/07, Israel Junior <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> On 1/10/07, Fabiano Furtado Pessoa Coelho  wrote:
> > >>> Hi people,
> > >>>
> > >>> I´v been thinking about new feature on pacman.
> > >>>
> > >>> Why not to show the each package size on the install package list,
> > >>> just befere the download/instalation?
> > >>>
> > >>> Like: <package name> (SIZE) | <package name> (SIZE) | <package name> 
> > >>> (SIZE)
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks in advance...
> > >>> Fusca

> > >> You can view a package's size with pacman -Si pkgname.

> > > Yes, I know but I want to see the package size on the 'pacman -Su' 
> > > package list.

> > > Thanks...

> > That's already been asked for a lot of times, but technically there is
> > no proper way to implement it. So it was decided by the lords of cobol
> > this feature should not be. So say we all.

> Well, there is something here that doesn't match... if I can discover
> the size of a package with pacman -Si <package-name>, why can't this
> information be showed in pacman -Su? Maybe it takes longer but it
> could be an optional parameter.


I have to admit that I haven't looked at the code for pacman but
even though it's a bit of a cosmetic change only, I personally don't
find it objectionable to show the size of each package that is
selected for downloading.
I don't know about the "but technically there is no proper way to
implement it" statement, I'd rather review the code first than to
fire off the hip in response to a coment like that.

Regards,
Dan

_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch

Reply via email to