Re: Slow completion when using aptitude

[Frank Terbeck <ft@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

cheer_xiao wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Frank Terbeck <ft@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> [snip]
>> _aptitude does more than _apt-get. If the second <tab> doesn't take as
>> long as the first, you probably got caching enabled via zstyle.
>
> So the problem is, as I understand, the cache for apt-get is
> persistent, while that of aptitude isn't.
[...]

The difference is, that "aptitude install <tab>" lists uninstalled
packages, whereas "apt-get install <tab>" simply lists all available
packages. The former, while being more appropriate, also takes more
work.

I must admit, that I'm not quite familiar with how compsys' caching is
implemented. I may be giving wrong pointers here. So I should better be
quiet.

>> [snip]
>> Are you sure you don't have two competing versions of zsh installed?
>> Then it may be possible that "print $ZSH_VERSION" and "zsh --version"
>> would yield different results.
[...]
> xiaq@~> aptitude -h | grep build
> [no result]
> xiaq@~> apt-get | grep build
>   build-dep - Configure build-dependencies for source packages
>
>
> I doubt whether zsh's tab-completion of aptitude's(and other
> utilities') verbs works by looking at "aptitude -h" first to generate
> the verbs list. If so, the problem should be considered a bug of
> aptitude that ships with Ubuntu 10.04 instead of zsh. (This has been
> confirmed, so this minor bug belongs to aptitude instead of zsh.)

The aptitude completion *does* in fact look at "aptitude -h" to figure
out which sub-commands to offer. And my aptitude does include it in its
output. Are you sure that your aptitude supports `build-dep'? Because
its author claims the help message was updated the in the same version
the functionality was added:
    <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=501998#10>

(Although I think I remember an aptitude that had `build-dep' and didn't
list it in -h output. But I'm not sure.)

Regards, Frank

-- 
In protocol design, perfection has been reached not when there is
nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
                                                  -- RFC 1925