Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 06 Jun 2000 14:58:21 -0700
From:      bmah@cisco.com (Bruce A. Mah)
To:        Thomas Schuerger <schuerge@wjpserver.CS.Uni-SB.DE>
Cc:        Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Check for ports updates 
Message-ID:  <200006062158.e56LwLT23308@bmah-freebsd-0.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <200006062025.WAA12391@wjpserver.cs.uni-sb.de> 
References:  <200006062025.WAA12391@wjpserver.cs.uni-sb.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
If memory serves me right, Thomas Schuerger wrote:
> > > Is there already a tool that checks the installed ports for available
> > > updates in /usr/ports?
> > > 
> > > I've written such a tool, which seems to work fine already. Anyone
> > > interested?
> > 
> > pkg_version(1)
> 
> Ah, haven't seen that before. The output of pkg_version is very
> canonical, but not very readable for humans. And it's slower than my
> version... ;-)

Without having looked at ports_updates yet, let me just mention that:

1.  If you want human-readable output, try "pkg_version -v".  Maybe 
that should have been a default; certainly I always run it that way.  
But in the case that a program was going to postprocess the output, I 
didn't want it to have to wade through a bunch of pretty-printing stuff 
to get the results it needed.

2.  When I was writing pkg_version, speed wasn't exactly a big priority 
to me, since pretty much *anything* was faster than what I was doing.

Bruce.

PS.  I've been really bad about ignoring suggestions for pkg_version, 
mostly because it does everything I need/want it to do right now.





To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200006062158.e56LwLT23308>