#649 closed defect (fixed)
port list (or search .+) does not show all ports
Reported by: | robert@… | Owned by: | fkr@… |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
Component: | base | Version: | 1.0 |
Keywords: | Cc: | ||
Port: |
Description
If you run a "port list", or a "port search" when you have multiple source directories listed in your / etc/ports/sources.conf file (e.g. multiple PortIndex locations), the search will only show matches from the first PortIndex that matches, not all of them.
Example, if I have /opt/dports-dev then /opt/darwinports/dports listed in my /etc/ports/ sources.conf file, and I issue:
port list (or port search .+)
it will only show me the ports in my /opt/dports-dev index. But if I do:
port search apache
and I don't have any ports in /opt/dports-dev with 'apache' in the name, it will properly list the ones in /opt/darwinports/dports just fine.
A quick look at the "darwinports.tcl" code in the "dportsearch" procedure reveals that the variable "match" is getting set to 1 when at least one match is found when cycling through the source locations, which causes it to abort before searching all source locations.
Change History (4)
comment:1 Changed 21 years ago by robert@…
comment:2 Changed 21 years ago by robert@…
Cc: | fkr@… added |
---|---|
op_sys: | All → Mac OS X |
rep_platform: | All → ppc |
Can someone please comment/fix this? Or at least tell me if it's not going to be fixed? I hate having local changes that are not going to be added.
Thanks.
comment:3 Changed 21 years ago by rshaw@…
Cc: | fkr@… removed |
---|---|
Owner: | changed from darwinports-bugs@… to fkr@… |
Can you look at this and commit it? I don't think I have commit access to the base tree.
comment:4 Changed 20 years ago by rshaw@…
Resolution: | → fixed |
---|---|
Status: | new → closed |
This apparently was fixed. -rshaw
I found a log entry that added the code that appears to cause this problem:
revision 1.47 date: 2002/09/29 09:43:57; author: landonf; state: Exp; lines: +4 -0 Don't jump indexes if we found matches in the first index This will be entirely less relavent when/if individuals don't have multiple indexes containing the *same* software
Why was this added? It prevents listing/searching across multiple indexes? Why would this be bad? I realize if you had duplicates it would list them twice, but is that really a problem?