On 12/07/13 13:03, Drew DeVault wrote: >> Optional dependencies are (or should be) listed in a PKGBUILD in order >> of importance. We previously rejected outputting them in alphabetical >> order because of this. Given this patch just groups the installed/not >> installed nature of the optdepend, I suppose this is more reasonable, >> but I am still reluctant. > I can see the concern, but I think the importance of having a package > installed disappears once you already have it. >> Also, surely uninstalled optdepends are the more important ones and >> should be listed first. > The idea was getting them closer to the end of the output, where your caret > will be prepared to type them in and install. >
But that puts the most important uninstalled optdep in the middle of the output.
