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

Re: more on #92263, dpkg --list truncates package names

On Mon, 2004-12-27 at 20:18 -0500, Scott Schwartz wrote:

> | > This bug report, is wrongly labeled as "wishlist".  It should be
> | > "important", because it makes dpkg useless:
> | >=20
> | It does not make dpkg "useless", dpkg can still install, upgrade and
> | remove packages.
> It surely makes --list <pattern> useless.  How do you remove a package
> when you can't use --list to find out its name?  I would say it is clear
> that this is an important (and easy) bug to fix.
It's not an "important" bug in the severity sense, it would be nice to
be fixed though but dpkg is in freeze right now.

> | > More generally, unix programs should never truncate their output to fit
> | > a terminal. Terminals are irrelevent; pipes are everything.
> | >=20
> | Convention disagrees with you.  Programs nearly always truncate their
> | output to terminal width, but are usually a little brighter and don't
> | truncate where there's a pipe.
> I wouldn't say "nearly always", and in fact I can't think of any others,
> but I admit that there is some software out there that fails to follow
> proper unix conventions.  Please, please, please don't make one of
> debian's core utilities share that defect!
Which side are you arguing on here? it's hard to tell.  Unix convention
is that programs may behave differently if they're run on a terminal
than on a pipe.

$ ls
foo  bar
$ ls | cat

$ ps 23157
23157 ?        S      0:00 /usr/lib/evolution/evolution-data-server-1.0 --oaf-ac
$ ps 23157 | cat
23157 ?        S      0:00 /usr/lib/evolution/evolution-data-server-1.0 --oaf-activate-iid=OAFIID:GNOME_Evolution_DataServer_InterfaceCheck --oaf-ior-fd=48

It seems reasonable to me for "dpkg -l" to behave in the same manner, as
it's primarily a user information tool.

However I also think it's probably reasonable for the format to be
changed from fixed-width to expanding the name and version columns and
sacrificing the description space to fit the full package name and
version in.

You'd get the full-width description if you piped it.

This is a more complicated change, and not suitable for pre-release.

Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: