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

Re: apt-get readability



Hi,

On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 09:00:05PM +0100, Kuro Maii wrote:
> If a yum-like output can be implemented I would be very happy even if it
> would be with an extra commandline option.
> 
> I would also like to know other peoples opinion to the matter as I find
> the default output of apt-get to be very unreadable.

Well, it depends all on your personal preference I guess.
In this small example yum has a certain appeal, but have you tried it
with the antology of a dist-upgrade? The output of apt changing ~1000 of
packages in the same run is already quiet large, the same in yum style
would… huge.
The "appeal" is mostly that it has more whitespace which is presumbly
friendlier on the eye in short examples, but in big operations…

Personally I am also not sure what the point of displaying architecture
by default is. It's not like anyone would care (expect developers maybe)
in the general case. Most people don't even know what a hell an
architecture is… (amd64? I have an Intel processor…). We display it then
its needed. I made this happen, so I am probably horribly biased, but I
think its better this way.
Versions… well, I am usually not caring for it either. We have an option
for that though… (which also adds a lot of whitespace and displays the
 more interesting from-to-relation in upgrades)
Repository has a certain appeal, but mostly for those with lots of
repositories. Not so if you don't like on a proper debian system…
Showing download size by default seems also not that useful to me
(especially as I thought it would be install size first…).
And then there is the underlying difference: apt needs to run dpkg and
give it a proper voice as it can ask questions. rpm on the otherhand
can't, so yum can get away with not showing verbose output at all.

All in all, as I said: Personal preference.
apt-get output could certainly be better, but I am not convienced that
yum should be taken as an example for "better"…


It isn't rally hard to write your own frontend though, so if you feel
like wanting exactly this output, you could make it happen…


Best regards

David Kalnischkies

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: