On 8/2/07, Giorgio Lando <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi, thanks for your attention and help.
>

You're welcome!

> > In this line of pkgmk, what is the purpose of  "-a ''"?
> >
> > complete -f -c pkgmk -o cf -l config-file -a '' -r -d 'Use another
> > config'
>
> No purpose: I planned to create a function which should have looked for
> *.conf file, but afterwards I realized that the configuration file fot
> pkgmk does not require to be named in a certain way and I forgot to
> remove that "-a ''". I am going to remove it.

Ok.

>
> > And secondly, I generally try to put all function definitions into
> > their own autoloaded file in the 'functions' subdirectory of fish. The
> > reason for this is that fish automatically unloads rarely used
> > function definitions to save a bit of memory.
>
> Fine, then I guess that my functions should be added to
> functions/__fish_print_packages.fish . I will do that in the patch.

Every autoloaded function must live in a file named like the function
but with an added '.fish'-suffix. So a function named
__fish_prt_no_subcommand must live in
share/functions/__fish_prt_no_subcommand.fish. Otherwise, fish won't
know how to locate the function.

>
> > Other than that, everything looks good. One thing I'd like to ask
> > about, though, is performance. Since I unfortunatly have not yet tried
> > crux, I don't know how fast or slow the package manager is. The 'rpm'
> > command is much too slow at printing a list of installed packages for
> > direct use, meaning fish has to cache the rpm output. This is not the
> > case with debian packages or gentoo packages. How fast/slow is crux at
> > package listing?
>
> Very fast, I do not think that a cache is required.
> In the functions, I use three commands. The following is the output of
> 'time' for them in my system (a medium spec machine).
>
> 1)'prt-get list' (a list of ports, i.e. the packages which could be
> installed);
>
> real 0.03
> user 0.00
> sys 0.00
>
> 2)'prt-get listinst' (a list of installed packages)
>
> real 0.04
> user 0.01
> sys 0.00
>
> 3) 'pkginfo -i' (a list of installed packages with a more basic package
> management tool).
>
> real 0.10
> user 0.08
> sys 0.00
>

Excellent. Should be ok speed-wise even on old hardware.

> > A final comment: If you resend the completions as a darcs patch, darcs
> > will track you as the official submitter. This might not seem like a
> > big thing today, but when fish becomes the dominating computer
> > interface for all people in a few years, you could be famous. Worth
> > thinking about. :)
>
> I am fully ignorant about darcs, but I will try to figure out how this
> is different from cvs and svn in the next days. About my future fame, it
> would
> require not only the domain of fish as a shell but also the domain of
> crux as a linux distribution (and the domain of linux as an operating
> system): my best wishes! :P

I've personally found darcs to be much simpler to use than other
verion control systems. It is possible it just fits with my way of
thinking, but I usually find that dose what I want it to to a much
higher degree than other versioning systems. On the minus-side, it
seems possible to make darcs break repos, and it is slower than many
other systems. YMMV.

>
> > Let me know if you have the time to make a revised set of completions.
>
> I have a bit of time, I need to become familiar with darcs. I hope to be
> able to send the revised completions in the next days, or weeks.

Looking forward to it!

>
> Thanks again
> Giorgio


Axel

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Fish-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users

Reply via email to