On Sun, 2013-05-19 at 23:50:56 -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > > - Preparing to replace foo 1.0 (using .../foo_2.0-1_amd64.deb) ... > > Unpacking replacement foo ... > > - Setting up foo (2.0-1) ... > > > > but also the less oftem messages like: > > - (Reading database ... ?% > > - Processing triggers for ? > > > > Quite frankly, these are usually boring... as (usually) nothing interesting > > happens on > > them. > > I wonder if this is a sign that dpkg is too noisy. It's often hard to > see real warnings from maintainer scripts admid the normal dpkg noise. > Would it make sense to skip the "Unpacking" message, for example, > since it is not necessary for figuring out which maintainer script > produced a given message?
I think there's already a request to add support for --quiet, which would get rid of most of the point of this bug report. > I also wonder if frontends have enough information to do the > coloration you're asking for without parsing output lines. Can > frontends pass an argument to suppress messages that are redundant > next to information that was sent to the --status-fd? Hmm, perhaps with some smart interception. It would be easier to do it from dpkg itself. Although if this is to be implemented it really does will have very low priority. I'll have to think about it in any case. Thanks, Guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
