Sorry about this, I can't find the original, so here goes! On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 16:23, Svein Harald Soleim wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Wednesday 16 July 2003 23:15, Bram De Smet wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I've been thinking... Great start! Sorry, had to, long day, you know how it goes I'm sure.
> most of the times I emerge a new application, I > > heard about it or knew it from my Slackware days. > > I think it would be good if we had a better overview of what programs > > are in the portage. Agreed. > > > > I don't mind using a term at all (I use all the time) but a nice > > graphical interface with extended information would be nice. We have them. kportage for example. Not perfect, but more than enough for most people. > > Yeah I agree, there is to little information, even debian's "apt-cache search" > get better information about packages then the "emerge --search" But have you noticed the time it takes to search already. With longer descriptions, its not gonna get quicker... I know you didn't mention that, but still. > The thing > about apt-cache is that it also search through the information and not just > the package name. With a GUI interface there would also be easy to see what > version of a package in the tree. (even if its masked) > > > I've seen things like Red Carpet en Yast on the desktops of friends and > > collegues. I bet that is possible for the Gentoo portage tree as well. > > > > Now all I want to hear are arguments contra or pro such gui. > > Please don't give me any response like 'if you want graphical, go redhat > > or suse. Be mature ;-) > > Mandrake then ;P Ummm, no. I'm not sure how portage stores data. It doesn't seem efficient however with the speed of queries. My thought would be to implement a mini-db. However, I don't know that this would really solve things (it'd be nice and easy to maintain...). I can't say that any database would necessarily save much time on searches. I do like the idea of more descriptive entries, however, I feel that this would unnecessarily bog down portage. We do, btw, have a way to search descriptions. It just so happens that its seperate from --search (that way search isn't so slow). I believe the option is something like --searchdesc I know for short options its -S. Ultimately, we may need a revamp of the internals for portage, but since I haven't had the chance to see what makes it tick, I couldn't tell you. I believe the dev guys have their reasons for not making it a db, but I can't recall if they said why. -- Christopher In 1968 it took the computing power of 2 C-64's to fly a rocket to the moon. Now, in 1998 it takes the Power of a Pentium 200 to run Microsoft Windows 95. Something must have gone wrong.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
