2013/10/5 郑文辉(Techlive Zheng) <[email protected]>: > 2013/10/4 Jeremy Heiner <[email protected]>: >> I'm using -Qkkk right now (easy hack, minimal footprint), but like the >> output format that can easily be tweaked. >> >> One reason I keep associating this new find untracked feature with the >> existing '--check's is that they are algorithmic cousins. From the >> controller (query.c) point of view these 3 features are called in >> basically identical ways. And from the implementation (check.c) view >> they all have the same shape (for each file in list call 1 or more >> predicates). However, I'm definitely not implying that implementation >> details should dictate user interface. >> >> But there seems to be a deeper reason. It's rooted in the use case. >> Consider what actions the user must do to achieve the goal. At a >> minimum(*) they must invoke pacman twice. Just -Qk isn't enough >> because it ignores the mtrees. And just -Qkk checks nothing for >> packages without an mtree. Am I wrong to think that adding another >> step is the wrong direction to go to help the user achieve their goal? >> >> So I want to advocate for a solution that does all the steps in a >> single invocation. I don't want to remove the ability to run the steps >> independently. In fact, I think it makes a lot of sense for the output >> of the single invocation to be very terse, providing the 10,000 foot >> view, and the user needs to re-invoke (w/ different args) for more >> detail on any problems noted in the overview. >> >> (*)Are there other steps that should be folded in? My brain is so down >> in the weeds of the implementation right now that I don't completely >> trust my view of the trees, much less the forest. >> > > Yeah, I second your propose, I used to combine `find` and `pacman -Qo` > to accomplish this, but it is too time consuming, being able to have > this as a built-in feature and an option would be really great.
As for the output format, anything parsable for a later processing would be fine.
