refactor(cli): Move sysinfo formatting into its own function

[amithadityacp]

Description

This pull request refactors the --sysinfo command output for better code organization and readability, following the Single Responsibility Principle.

Changes Made

• Moved the output formatting logic from the main() function directly into the get_system_info() function.
• The get_system_info() function now returns a fully formatted, multi-line string, making it a self-contained utility.
• The if sysinfo: block in the main() function is now simplified to a single, clean print() call.

Related Issue

Closes #1194

---

Important

Refactors --sysinfo command output by moving formatting logic to get_system_info(), simplifying main() function.

• Behavior:
  • Refactors --sysinfo command output in main() by moving formatting logic to get_system_info().
  • get_system_info() now returns a formatted string with system details.
  • Simplifies if sysinfo: block in main() to a single print() call.
• Functions:
  • get_system_info() now includes formatting logic for system information.
• Misc:
  • Closes issue Improve --sysinfo by providing version data and env variables insights #1194.

^{This description was created by for 425521c. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed everything up to 425521c in 1 minute and 30 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 55 lines of code in 1 files
• Skipped 1 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 2 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. gpt_engineer/applications/cli/main.py:243

• Draft comment:
  The PR description/title mentions support for Gemini and Ollama, but no changes for these integrations are present.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 0% <= threshold 50% This comment is asking the PR author to update the PR description or title, which is against the rules. It does not provide a specific code suggestion or ask for a test to be written. Therefore, it should be removed.

2. gpt_engineer/applications/cli/main.py:271

• Draft comment:
  The refactored sysinfo now omits package details. If package info is still desired, consider including it or updating related functions.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50% The change appears intentional - the old code is commented out and the new code has a docstring explaining it returns formatted system details. The removal of package info seems to be a deliberate simplification. The comment is just pointing out something that was intentionally changed, not identifying a bug or suggesting a clear improvement. The comment could be valid if package info was an important feature that shouldn't have been removed. Maybe there are use cases that require package info for debugging. While package info could be useful, the change appears intentional and the comment doesn't make a strong case for why it needs to be kept. The comment is more of an observation than actionable feedback. Delete the comment since it's just pointing out an intentional change without making a clear case for why it should be reverted.

Workflow ID: wflow_jC0PovBvfZWpMnkj

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}