[gentoo-dev] qpkg

[gentoo-dev] qpkg

[John Stalker]

qpkg is quite useful.  Thanks, Vitaly.
--
John Stalker
Department of Mathematics
Princeton University
(609)258-6469

Re: [gentoo-dev] qpkg

[Vitaly Kushneriuk]

On Sun, 2002-01-13 at 16:46, John Stalker wrote:
> qpkg is quite useful.  Thanks, Vitaly.
Thanks, I'm glad you find it usefull.
I was waiting for more feedback :-)
Any one using it out there? HAve some comments?

Regards,
	/Vitaly.

Re: [gentoo-dev] qpkg

[Miguel Sousa Filipe]

Hi all!

Allthough i'm not using gentoo for a while, i'm tracking, the mailing
lists.. to check out how its going.
About qpgk, i believe that if it's not allready quite a handy "pocket knife"
in Gentoo, it will become one, I find it so "cool" and practical, basically,
ITS A MUST in gentoo.
It's extremelly usefull for checking if a certain package is installed, what
files owns, wich version it is, and also to see the owner of certain files,
among other things.
It would be nice to also check, and "confront" the available version, with
the installed version of a package that has just been queried. Something
like:
 I do not know if it does this.. but it would be nice.. to see the version
of the installed and the latest version available.


Keep up the good work everyone!

Cheers, Miguel Sousa Filipe
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vitaly Kushneriuk" <vitaly_kushneriuk@yahoo.com>
To: "Gentoo-dev" <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] qpkg


> On Sun, 2002-01-13 at 16:46, John Stalker wrote:
> > qpkg is quite useful.  Thanks, Vitaly.
> Thanks, I'm glad you find it usefull.
> I was waiting for more feedback :-)
> Any one using it out there? HAve some comments?
>
> Regards,
> /Vitaly.
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] qpkg

[Vitaly Kushneriuk]

On Sun, 2002-01-13 at 19:39, Miguel Sousa Filipe wrote:
> Hi all!
> 
> Allthough i'm not using gentoo for a while, i'm tracking, the mailing
> lists.. to check out how its going.
> About qpgk, i believe that if it's not allready quite a handy "pocket knife"
> in Gentoo, it will become one, I find it so "cool" and practical, basically,
> ITS A MUST in gentoo.
Thanks :-)

> It would be nice to also check, and "confront" the available version, with
> the installed version of a package that has just been queried. Something
> like:
>  I do not know if it does this.. but it would be nice.. to see the version
> of the installed and the latest version available.

Proper implementation would require checking with package mask.
I'll think if it can be done in bash. 
This kind of tool should be implemented in python.  
I wrote it initialy as a replacer for my frequent 
"grep ... /var/db/pkg/*/*/CONTENTS" etc. stuff. It quite involved since
then, and now it's kind of reached state when it's easier to reimplement
it in Python then add some useful feature to the existing bash
implementation. I'll defently do it when I have time. Expect it to be
ready soon :-). Any feature requests?

BTW, Python is my weapon of choise for most non trivial scripting.
  The reasons I used bash, are:
    1) I didn't want to reimplement grep :-)
       grep/sed stuff is realy fast. "pkgsearch portage" is 10 times
       faster then "pkgsearch portage". ( well, I guess reimplementation
       of pkgsearch to not allways load the entire db would help)
    2) I wanted it quick and I allready had some bash scripts that
       perform a single task.
    1) it was fun
    

Re: [gentoo-dev] qpkg

[Brent Cook]

I liked it too. Very useful for finding duplicate packages. Your bash
style was also enlightening for me. I had no clue how to use colors until
then.

Perhaps, though, qpkg should not flag major revisions as duplicates.  For
instance, qpkg flags the following packages as duplicates:

x11-libs/qt-2.3.1
x11-libs/qt-3.0.1
media-libs/freetype-2.0.5-r1
media-libs/freetype-1.3.1-r3
sys-devel/automake-1.4_p5
sys-devel/automake-1.4-r2

The first two sets are not duplicates because they are incompatible major
versions. The dbm libraries also have this issue (there are three major
versions in common use, though I'm not sure what's included with gentoo.)
I have no idea what to do about the last set - it's not possible to tell
by the name which is more recent (I'm not sure how I got into this
situation either!)

 - Brent

On 13 Jan 2002, Vitaly Kushneriuk wrote:

> On Sun, 2002-01-13 at 16:46, John Stalker wrote:
> > qpkg is quite useful.  Thanks, Vitaly.
> Thanks, I'm glad you find it usefull.
> I was waiting for more feedback :-)
> Any one using it out there? HAve some comments?
>
> Regards,
> 	/Vitaly.
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] qpkg

[Bart Verwilst]

Hi

That kind of search/find capabilities will be available in a very short
time in one of the next portage versions.. Currently, the app can be 
obtained on http://www.gentoo.org/~verwilst, but it will be a part of 
emerge in a matter of days i think.. The major version stuff will be
present in emerge as well (so for example qt-3 and qt-2 will be seen as
diff apps..)

Thanks

On Sun, 2002-01-13 at 19:01, Brent Cook wrote:
> I liked it too. Very useful for finding duplicate packages. Your bash
> style was also enlightening for me. I had no clue how to use colors until
> then.
> 
> Perhaps, though, qpkg should not flag major revisions as duplicates.  For
> instance, qpkg flags the following packages as duplicates:
> 
> x11-libs/qt-2.3.1
> x11-libs/qt-3.0.1
> media-libs/freetype-2.0.5-r1
> media-libs/freetype-1.3.1-r3
> sys-devel/automake-1.4_p5
> sys-devel/automake-1.4-r2
> 
> The first two sets are not duplicates because they are incompatible major
> versions. The dbm libraries also have this issue (there are three major
> versions in common use, though I'm not sure what's included with gentoo.)
> I have no idea what to do about the last set - it's not possible to tell
> by the name which is more recent (I'm not sure how I got into this
> situation either!)
> 
>  - Brent
> 
> On 13 Jan 2002, Vitaly Kushneriuk wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2002-01-13 at 16:46, John Stalker wrote:
> > > qpkg is quite useful.  Thanks, Vitaly.
> > Thanks, I'm glad you find it usefull.
> > I was waiting for more feedback :-)
> > Any one using it out there? HAve some comments?
> >
> > Regards,
> > 	/Vitaly.
> > _______________________________________________
 
-- 

Bart Verwilst
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop Team
Gent, Belgium

Re: [gentoo-dev] qpkg

[Vitaly Kushneriuk]

> Perhaps, though, qpkg should not flag major revisions as duplicates.  For
> instance, qpkg flags the following packages as duplicates:
> 
> x11-libs/qt-2.3.1
> x11-libs/qt-3.0.1
> media-libs/freetype-2.0.5-r1
> media-libs/freetype-1.3.1-r3
> sys-devel/automake-1.4_p5
> sys-devel/automake-1.4-r2
> 
> The first two sets are not duplicates because they are incompatible major
> versions. The dbm libraries also have this issue (there are three major
> versions in common use, though I'm not sure what's included with gentoo.)
> I have no idea what to do about the last set - it's not possible to tell
> by the name which is more recent (I'm not sure how I got into this
> situation either!)
I think it's not "The Right Thing (tm)" to make qpkg
handle freetype/db/qt libraries as a special cases.
Having multiple UNcompatible versions of the same PACKAGE
(note: not library) will interfere with a lot of other stuff.
Consider something like "--autounmerge" options(I'd like to see
something like this in portage btw.) that would unmerge old version
if newer version successfully installed.
The proper way IMHO would be to split freetype into freetype and
freetype2, removing all conflicts. The same aplies to db/db2/db3 etc.
This is the standard way of dealing with such stuff I think.
I can add some exceptions list to qpkg, though, if freetype maintainer
(Daniel?) does not want to split it.

Re: [gentoo-dev] qpkg

[Charles Kerr]

Well, I know I missed it, how does one get qpkg (cleaned out my mailbox's 
without getting the old mail *sigh*).  Is it in portage?

Re: [gentoo-dev] qpkg

[Vitaly Kushneriuk]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 236 bytes --]

On Sun, 2002-01-13 at 20:03, Charles Kerr wrote:
> Well, I know I missed it, how does one get qpkg (cleaned out my mailbox's 
> without getting the old mail *sigh*).  Is it in portage?
Here is the repost of a slightly improved version.

[-- Attachment #2: qpkg.gz --]
[-- Type: application/x-gzip, Size: 2877 bytes --]