On 14-01-23 08:38:22, Andrew Gregory wrote: > On 01/23/14 at 12:07am, Pierre Neidhardt wrote: > > No more per-repo coloring: this was not Arch-agnostic, and there is no > > reasonable, simple way to color repos in a consistant manner with only 6 > > colors. > > > > 'local' is in red: this way we benefit from the pacman -Ss && pacman -Qs > > combo. > > > > to_color subroutine: it takes an array instead of a string, this is faster > > and > > simpler. > > > > Signed-off-by: Pierre Neidhardt <[email protected]> > > --- > > contrib/pacsearch.in | 32 ++++++++++++++------------------ > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > If we use pacman's color theme and remove per-repo coloring does this script > still do anything worth keeping it around and fixing its bugs (try `pacsearch > pacman mirrorlist`)? All that's left is searching both -Ss and -Qs, > recoloring > "local/" red, adding "[installed]" to -Qs entries, and hiding -Qs entries that > are also in -Ss. All but the last can be accomplished in a few lines of bash > using sed.
That was what I suggested in the first place a few days ago in my 'request for removal' mail. But Dan finds the combo of -Ss and -Qs quite useful and pointed quite good reasons to keep it. This script is tiny, right, but not enough to be a one-liner (the "duplicate entry removal" needs a hash table and some parsing). Besides when you do it with sed/awk, you lose the coloring. And with sed/awk it's hard to sort without another call to 'sort', which does not save time. All these reasons are good enough to have this script. If I understood you correctly, `pacsearch pacman mirrorlist` is not a bug. pacsearch's argument is a pattern, not package names. See pacsearch -h. -- Pierre Neidhardt What the large print giveth, the small print taketh away.
