port list confusion

[Lawrence Velázquez]

On Jun 20, 2013, at 1:06 PM, Craig Treleaven <ctreleaven at cogeco.ca> wrote:

> At 11:35 AM -0400 6/20/13, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
>> I'm not sure how this makes sense. The "port info" subcommand is intended to produce as much useful information as is reasonable, not lists of ports. If "port installed" produced the output of "port info" for every port I had installed, I'd shoot myself in the face.
> 
> Try 'port info --fullname --category --line installed';  see 'port help info' for all the options.

Point.

>> And "port echo" is kind of its own thing. It's intended for checking what pseudoports and complex port specifications (using logical operators and such) evaluate to, which is why it only prints port names.
> 
> 'port list requested' is awfully darn similar to 'port echo requested'.

That's kind of incidental; the semantics are not necessarily the same. It's unfortunate that "port list" is so slow and weird that lots of people resort to what's really a debugging command. (Myself included. I never use "port list".)

vq