On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 15:16:56 +1100
Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...it's the same as 361125 and 289351, and they were fixed & closed
> with the release of dlocate 0.7 last year.
I'm sorry, thanks for the reminder, I had somehow forgotten about
#361125.
> see the '-lsman' option of dlocate.
>
> you should have got notification of that when 361125 was closed
> because you were the original reporter of 361125 as well as 152207.
(#152207 was opened by "Lazarus Long" in 2002.)
Yesterday I was reviewing an email archive of #152207, written before I
learned about the BTS 'unarchive' command; bug #152207 lacked a
cross-reference to #361125. I should add one.
The #152207 closing is still puzzling; '-lsman' does add the desired
full pathname functionality, which is good. But the current '-man'
output remains redundant:
% dlocate -s dlocate | grep Ver
Version: 0.94
# show 22 redundant lines output
% dlocate -man apt | wc -l
33
% dlocate -man apt | sort -u | wc -l
11
# show sorted output with count of duplicate lines
% dlocate -man apt | sort | uniq -c
4 5 apt.conf
4 5 apt_preferences
3 5 sources.list
3 8 apt
4 8 apt-cache
4 8 apt-cdrom
3 8 apt-config
4 8 apt-get
2 8 apt-key
1 8 apt-mark
1 8 apt-secure
Granted some users require or prefer the '-man' switch output ('#
manpagename'), but a duplicate line seems useless. A review of the
three related bugs, (#152207, #289351, and #361125) shows that since
2002, four users ("Long", Metzler, Jacobson, & Costa) considered the
duplicate lines a bug. Were we all mistaken, and if so, how?
HTH...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
