Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: Debian _deb_packages_update_uninstalled() doesn't use cache?
- X-seq: zsh-workers 25467
- From: "Matt Wozniski" <godlygeek@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Debian _deb_packages_update_uninstalled() doesn't use cache?
- Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:26:07 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=iOiHdGz/R/74O3qYq+2bZ6kyWN5Bcpy72PpWtD55ISo=; b=Ht3ZNtgb3cuBNuxaWO4LCKN7Ki1Q68Eai8jY/j8nbKFY2VBlU/jkKsfpVWI9NjymJs cKEmCUoScKDuWG5vIidymRUh7NE9+FYGSvppizlOq5Nc8pvXalhcuVZYsDdCogaR1GFN CAFU1YohoO5UNE5/hCgCb8tGFwYWLZeXX7jCo=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=HjiKQ2OeZZDnDPuAVdGI78BAJ2RfFGP6emf7vmvuNI6SanzRon7lbe9Y5hGpU93vQ2 Xo+9C5/QrrkYSh9ouKeM6Yaszpw+oymCgFWoyvKWUCftslxyqJPjSskXUzD36LdaymQ7 /EUyjm35OBeVSUa3mn8JO4tjoYoZtv9ckVtX0=
- In-reply-to: <17393e3e0807070136t701b2b62u94001c211697697c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <17393e3e0807070136t701b2b62u94001c211697697c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 4:36 AM, Matt Wozniski wrote:
> As the subject indicates, this is a problem I have with a Debian
> specific completer, but, since it's in CVS, I figured this is the
> right place to ask... Let me know if I'm wrong.
> Anyway, if I'm reading these functions right, then
> _deb_packages_update_avail() and _deb_packages_update_installed() use
> the cache, but _deb_packages_update_uninstalled() doesn't - even
> though depends upon the cached data of _update_avail() and
> _update_installed(). _update_uninstalled() seems to just be filtering
> out the available packages (as found by _update_avail()) that are also
> installed (as found by _update_installed()) so that they aren't
> suggested as possible packages to install. It seems to me that we're
> not caching the operation that's most time consuming, even though it's
> outcome is based entirely upon two operations whose outcomes are
> cached. As a result, completion for "aptitude install" (which uses
> "_deb_packages uninstalled") is much slower than for "apt-get install"
> (which uses "_deb_packages available") on my machine, at least for the
> first completion in a newly opened shell.
> Anyone have any insight to why _deb_packages_update_uninstalled()
> might be doing this, or is this a bug?
Messages sorted by: