[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: dselect improvements

Steve Greenland <stevegr@debian.org> writes:

> On 08-Oct-99, 07:54 (CDT), Milan Zamazal <mz@pdm.pvt.net> wrote: 
> > [dselect improvements] 
> > Before I invest my resources into this, I'd like to know, whether anyone
> > is doing anything about this, so that I didn't do duplicate work?  This
> > is currently my only question, I'm NOT asking what dselect should be
> > able to do etc., and I'm only partially interested in notices about
> > needles of such work.
> As another person who actually likes dselect (well, "likes" may be to
> strong, but there's a lot of functionality that hasn't yet been put in
> apt-console), Here's a list of things I'd like to see (more or less in
> order of importance):

I hate dselect, but over time I learned to use it. I was impressed by
console-apt when I saw it, but its features are a bit limited and
buggy at the moment.

Maybe its better to put all effort into console-apt than into the old
dusty dselect.

> 1. Only check recommends/suggests when the status of a package changes
> (i.e. unselected->selected). The continual prompting/overriding is
> horribly annoying.

console-apt misses that completly. :(

> 2. Search should look at the short descriptions in addition to the names.
> 3. Search should look at section names (i.e. /net (or possibly some
> other key, seperate from the package name/description search) should
> look for the next instance of the "net" section).

There should be a mask for search with fields for all the stuff a
package has, so you can search for a package in net that has some
keyword in the description.

> 4. I've been using dselect for >4 years, and I *still* don't understand
> the interaction between 'O' and 'o' when sorting. I just fumble around
> until I get something close to what I want. This may be a documentation
> issue rather than a code issue.

Try console-apt and hit "s". You then get a list of possible sort
options. It laks some sort orders and is not perfect, but you directly 
know what you get.

> 5. It ough to leave the foreground/background alone, rather than forcing
> light on dark (xterm).

May the Source be with you.

Reply to: