> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:53 AM, Xavier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 2:09 AM, Nagy Gabor > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> See: > >> http://repo.or.cz/w/pacman-ng.git?a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/working > >> > >> This is a big behavior change (iirc it restores the old behavior). > >> Opinions? > >> > > > > This is fine for me. But that means we consider bug 7884 as invalid, > > which was opened by Dan. So as I said in the last comment of that > > bug, we have to wait for his input :) > > Damn, this is a huge code cleanup. I like it. I've pulled it into my > working branch (the latest version). > > One thing I noticed and/or thought of- should we make the return > status of this command different depending on whether there are > upgrades available? That would make this super-easy to wrap in some > sort of "up2date" script or something rather than having to parse the > output.
This is a good idea. But there is something I missed before my comment on FS#11737. The new -Qu ignores replacements. However, my comment there has some suggestions (independent from -Qu) which could "fix" this. (However this is a minor issue irl, imho) Bye _______________________________________________ pacman-dev mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
