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

Re: apt-get -qq install



davidson wrote:
> >
> > I'm trying to quiet apt's output by using `apt-get -qqy` in a CI/CD
> > pipeline, however I still see ugly stuff like this in my CI/CD log:
> >
> > Selecting previously unselected package php-common.
> > (Reading database ...
> > (Reading database ... 5%
> > (Reading database ... 10%
> [snip]
> >
> > and this:
> >
> > Scanning processes... [                                                        ]
> > Scanning processes... [                                                        ]
> > Scanning processes... [                                                        ]
> > Scanning processes... [=                                                       ]
> > Scanning processes... [=                                                       ]
> > Scanning processes... [==                                                      ]
> > Scanning processes... [==                                                      ]
> [snip]
> 
> > Don't you think the `-qq` modifier should spare me these things?
> 
> I would expect so too.
> 
> > I don't actually like the idea of redirecting apt-get's output to
> > /dev/null because I want to see the list of packages installed, but without
> > these pseudographics. Do you think it's possible? Any ideas?
> 
> In the file
> 
>   /usr/share/doc/apt/examples/configure-index.gz
> 
> I notice there is a stanza that begins like so:
> 
>   quiet "<INT>" {
>     NoUpdate "<BOOL>"; // never update progress information - included in -q=1
>     NoProgress "<BOOL>"; // disables the 0% -> 100% progress on cache generation and stuff
> 
> I don't know whether this will help you, but it does look suggestive.

Thank you, how do you activate this option? I've just tried 
`apt-get -o quiet::NoProgress=true -qqy ...` but the "Reading database ... 5%"
stuff is still there.


-- 
Victor Sudakov VAS4-RIPE
http://vas.tomsk.ru/
2:5005/49@fidonet

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: