Could apt learn from pacman?

[shifty2]

Currently, when you try to install/update through the terminal in ububtu you get the flurry of servers etc rushing down the screen and its just a bit chaotic.

In contrast, updating in archlinux with pacman looks like this:
:: Synchronising package databases...
core 24.5K 78.6K/s 00:00:00 [#####################] 100%
extra 312.9K 127.9K/s 00:00:02 [#####################] 100%
community 335.8K 146.6K/s 00:00:02 [#####################] 100%
unstable 4.7K 39.3K/s 00:00:00 [#####################] 100%
archlinuxfr 22.0K 122.2K/s 00:00:00 [#####################] 100%
local database is up to date
Which is much more clear and concise. Is there a reason this isn't implemented already?

[qamelian]

Personally, I prefer the apt method because it displays the results of specific repositories including any third party repos I have enabled. The results from pacman don't look all that informative to me.

[Skarjoko]

I've always liked the way pacman displayed the servers. I would personally love it if apt did something similar.

[shifty2]

That is all my repositories :-) In arch each "repository" is given a name, archlinuxfr being my only additional one. It shows exactly the same information as apt but in, i feel, neater way.

[qamelian]

That is all my repositories :-) In arch each "repository" is given a name, archlinuxfr being my only additional one. It shows exactly the same information as apt but in, i feel, neater way.
Then I guess I'm missing something. Are you just talking about the format of the output then? If so, then you're right that is certainly more readable.

[cdean]

Personally, I prefer the apt method because it displays the results of specific repositories including any third party repos I have enabled. The results from pacman don't look all that informative to me.

'Twould be cool if apt displayed like pacman, but spat out any lines with errors.

[nhandler]

I also agree. Pacman seems to have a nicer output than apt. Might I suggest adding this to brainstorm.ubuntu.com? That way, you could get feedback from many more users who may not visit the Intrepid Ibex Development forum here.

[rubicon]

Yep, pacman seems to be much cleaner than apt in this way! What should be as informative as apt now, is logs, imho :)

But knowing developers' eagerness about changes... Maybe it would be appropriate to add such cleaner view to aptitude instead (not sure about apt)? After all, it is considered as user-friendly front-end and definitely need clean interface.