On Fri, Jan 29, 1999 at 09:55:09PM -0600, Havoc Pennington was heard to say: > > Sometimes there are so many packages listed that the scroll bar won't take > > me to all of them. > > > > Urgh, I thought I got rid of this. I doubt it's a matter of number of > packages, though it could be. More likely some particular situation leads > to the problem. If you can guess at that... > > Can you arrow key or PageDown to the rest of the packages? Yes, I can. It only happens when I've expanded a subtree containing lots and lots of items. If I expand a dependancy tree (making the number of rows larger), I can scroll farther down (to the point where the last package is the same one as whatever it was before..so if xntp3 was the last package on the screen before I expanded the subtree, I can scroll until it's the last package again) I've gotten this to happen (at the moment) by expanding the Not Installed tree while grouping by status. I wonder if it's just related to the number of packages being listed? If I group by letter and expand trees one by one, then scroll as far down as possible, the position of the last node relative to the list pane moves farther and farther down as I progressively make more packages visible, until it finally vanishes off the bottom (and I have to use the keyboard to get to it) Also, there's a sporadic bug in the tree-view which shows up when I switch from one grouping mode to another; occasionally, the new tree isn't displayed, leaving me with a blank right pane. (switching to another grouping mode fixes the problem usually) > > Is it really necessary to display packages which have no available version? > > I can..perhaps..see a few benefits to tracking them, but unless they're > > installed, it seems to be redundant to display them since there's no way > > to install them; they just clutter up the display. > > > > I'd like a toggle for this too. What if I add a new status, Not > Installable, and then you can filter it? Ok. I think that it should be hidden by default, though. -- Daniel Burrows Nothing is hopeless. PROOF: (a) Assume the opposite. (b) If something _is_ hopeless, then its condition can only improve. (c) If its condition can only improve, then there must be hope for it. (d) Therefore, nothing is hopeless. QED.
Attachment:
pgpSnDV9mUyiZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature