Re: Source field in binary Packages list
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 02:20:27PM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> Why do you need #497205? Is it too slow to just use SourcePkg() in
> the package records object?
>
> Daniel
Sorry! I was lazy/stupid/whatever enough to not read more about apt and
learn how to do it without adding a field to the cache. So, I am
attaching the patch to the patch for aptitude, which does not need this
other patch to APT. I will close the apt bug after that.
I still like the patch to be reviewed, if you can, please.
Thanks,
Thadeu Cascardo.
diff -u aptitude-0.4.11.8/src/pkg_grouppolicy.cc aptitude-0.4.11.8/src/pkg_grouppolicy.cc
--- aptitude-0.4.11.8/src/pkg_grouppolicy.cc
+++ aptitude-0.4.11.8/src/pkg_grouppolicy.cc
@@ -1676,11 +1676,11 @@
void add_package(const pkgCache::PkgIterator &pkg, pkg_subtree *root)
{
-string source;
-if (!pkg.Source())
+if (pkg.VersionList().end() || pkg.VersionList().FileList().end())
+ return;
+string source=apt_package_records->Lookup(pkg.VersionList().FileList()).SourcePkg();
+if (source.length()==0)
source=pkg.Name();
-else
- source=pkg.Source();
childmap::iterator found=children.find(source);
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: Source field in binary Packages list
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 07:13:50PM -0300, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 03:21:36PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: > > Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I am working on a grouping feature for aptitude, to group binary > > > packages by their source package. However, some packages in the Packages > > > file do not have a Source field. My guess was to use the package name as > > > the source package name. Is this right? > > > > Yup > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Thadeu Cascardo. > > Thanks again! > > For those interested, I've submitted the patches to the BTS as bugs > 497205 and 497206. Note that 497205 should break libapt-pkg ABI, so take > care. :-) Why do you need #497205? Is it too slow to just use SourcePkg() in the package records object? Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Source field in binary Packages list
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 03:21:36PM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote: > Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I am working on a grouping feature for aptitude, to group binary > > packages by their source package. However, some packages in the Packages > > file do not have a Source field. My guess was to use the package name as > > the source package name. Is this right? > > Yup > > > > > Thanks, > > Thadeu Cascardo. Thanks again! For those interested, I've submitted the patches to the BTS as bugs 497205 and 497206. Note that 497205 should break libapt-pkg ABI, so take care. :-) Comments welcome. Regards, Thadeu Cascardo. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Source field in binary Packages list
Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote: > Hello, > > I am working on a grouping feature for aptitude, to group binary > packages by their source package. However, some packages in the Packages > file do not have a Source field. My guess was to use the package name as > the source package name. Is this right? Yup > > Thanks, > Thadeu Cascardo. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Source field in binary Packages list
Hello, I am working on a grouping feature for aptitude, to group binary packages by their source package. However, some packages in the Packages file do not have a Source field. My guess was to use the package name as the source package name. Is this right? Thanks, Thadeu Cascardo. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
