Re: funny results with 'port list inactive'

On Aug 22, 2006, at 11:51 PM, Bryan Blackburn wrote:

> On Aug 22, 2006, at 10:34 PM, Wojciech Grzemski wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I was in the process of upgrading my ports collection, when I've  
>> noticed that:
>> $ port list inactive | wc -l
>>   3481
>> $ port list | wc -l
>>   3481
>>
>> Is this to be expected?  Knowing that I have no inactive ports I  
>> would
>> prefer to have output similar to the one given by 'port outdated'.
>>

The pseudo portnames basically expand to a list of ports. By saying  
"port list inactive" you are effectively passing each port on the  
command line to list, which is giving you output for each. The  
command has no opportunity to look at the request from a high level  
and say "well, duh, there are no inactive ports.

> Note that the list command (from the man page) will "List all  
> available ports" so any arguments to it are most likely  
> superfluous, by my reading.  I think you want things like 'port  
> installed' and perhaps 'port installed inactive' (but since I don't  
> use port images, I can't test if this works).

Yes, sortof. But list will provide output about any specific ports  
that you name for it. In the case of "port list apache2", it would  
give list-style output about apache2. In the case of "port list all"  
it will separately give output about each port. Note that "port list"  
is a more efficient way to do the later, as it requires much less  
processing by port.

>
>> Also I seem to have quite a funny timings with different commands:
>> time for 'port list':
>> 	real    0m0.795s
>> 	user    0m0.538s
>> 	sys     0m0.100s
>>
>> time for  'port list all'
>> 	real    8m15.081s
>> 	user    7m48.300s
>> 	sys     0m17.354s
>>
>> time for 'port list | sort' (which seems to return the same list as
>> 'port list all'):
>> 	real    0m0.843s
>> 	user    0m0.537s
>> 	sys     0m0.135s
>>
>> Would anyone care to comment, explain?  My version of Darw^H^H^H^H  
>> MacPorts is 1.320.
>>
>
> The timing difference in 'port list all' is probably some  
> multiplicative effect where it is running list for each port (and  
> getting the same list each time) or something strange...

Yes, essentially so.
>
> Bryan
>
>
>> All the best,
>>
>> -- 
>> Wojciech Grzemski <[email protected]>            "On Margate  
>> Sands..."
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Darwinports mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.opendarwin.org/mailman/listinfo/darwinports