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

Re: dselect improvements

>>>>> "SG" == Steve Greenland <stevegr@debian.org> writes:

    SG> As another person who actually likes dselect (well, "likes" may
    SG> be to strong, but there's a lot of functionality that hasn't yet
    SG> been put in apt-console), Here's a list of things I'd like to
    SG> see (more or less in order of importance):

Well, it seems nobody is working on this, so I'll start to study dselect
sources.  I hope I'll have enough desire to do something in the next
half year, but do not promise anything.

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

I don't understand this.  When is the check performed except of status
change requests and quitting the selection?

    SG> 2. Search should look at the short descriptions in addition to
    SG> the names.

It should be also possible to search through everything.

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

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

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

All the three points are good ideas, IMO.

My priorities are (in order of importance):

1. To allow hiding/showing package groups.

2. See 2. above.

3. Showing disk space consumed/freed if the installation and removal was

4. Fixing problems with dselect when running inside Emacs.


Milan Zamazal

"Having GNU Emacs is like having a dragon's cave of treasures."
                                                Robert J. Chassell

Reply to: