-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ned Ludd wrote: > On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 14:03 -0800, Brian Harring wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 06:05:21PM +0200, Amit Dor-Shifer wrote: >>> Given the following: >>> # qlist -Iv sys-apps/portage >>> sys-apps/portage-2.1.4.5 >>> >>> How do I safely extract the "2.1.4.5"? >>> >>> (I don't necessarily need to use qlist. Just want to get the version of an >>> installed package within a bash script) >> This *really* should be folded into portageq offhand- it's the initial >> step towards shifting versionator logic (yet another standalone >> parser/comparison implementation) into the PM. >> >> Counter arguements? >> ~brian > > Yes. he said a bash script. portageq still takes a few seconds to load > and invokes far far to many instructions for very simple info. > > The 3 execve's I just posted are still faster than one portageq call. > So.. foo.c wins again. :p
Well, I think portageq will be fine if it's limited to a small number of calls. Here's a simple test, with portage-2.2_rc16: # time python -c "import portage.versions" real 0m0.141s user 0m0.124s sys 0m0.016s It's not so bad if it only has to be called a few times. For cases where a large number need to be split, they could be processed in a batch by a single portageq call, by either passing all the inputs in as arguments or writing them to stdin. - -- Thanks, Zac -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkks1oQACgkQ/ejvha5XGaM/fgCfQwG2gD0viF5qjcN0WBewlCxi 08sAoKBZYQy3Ttkb4KhFIChPVsbFjpQR =fc1x -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
