From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RDNS_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: (qmail 671 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2020 03:35:15 -0000 Received-SPF: pass (minnie.tuhs.org: domain of minnie.tuhs.org designates 45.79.103.53 as permitted sender) receiver=inbox.vuxu.org; client-ip=45.79.103.53 envelope-from= Received: from unknown (HELO minnie.tuhs.org) (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTP; 12 Mar 2020 03:35:15 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 8C5CD9BD0B; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:35:13 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E08749BB47; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:34:57 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id A92249BB47; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:34:55 +1000 (AEST) Received: from frieza.hoshinet.org (ks3374089.kimsufi.com [37.187.103.66]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76CEA9BB46 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2020 13:34:48 +1000 (AEST) Received: by frieza.hoshinet.org (Postfix, from userid 1005) id 352B41C8C79B; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 23:34:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by frieza.hoshinet.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2582A1C8C798; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 23:34:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 23:34:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Steve Nickolas X-X-Sender: nicci@frieza.hoshinet.org To: Greg 'groggy' Lehey In-Reply-To: <20200312030917.GJ89512@eureka.lemis.com> Message-ID: References: <202003031815.023IFSlD493028@darkstar.fourwinds.com> <20200311225638.GG89512@eureka.lemis.com> <20200312030917.GJ89512@eureka.lemis.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (BSF 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: Re: [TUHS] Command line options and complexity X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On Thu, 12 Mar 2020, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > On Wednesday, 11 March 2020 at 20:53:12 -0400, Steve Nickolas wrote: >> I went through all the switches defined by POSIX, and figured that >> those 26 could be cut down. > > A brave man to defy POSIX! I wasn't so brave, which is why we have > the -y option. xD >> My concept reduced the number of switches from 26 to 9 (FLRadfiln). >> Of course, the idea is to be more minimalist than POSIX, so some >> people's opinions on what is or isn't necessary may differ from >> mine. > > OK, let's compare notes: > >> I felt -A was a redundant "almost -a". > > Arguably -a could go too. The distinction seems arbitrary. Well, I think one or the other would be desirable. I figured -a was the better to keep - since it shows all dotfiles where -A leaves off . and .. . >> I felt -C and -x were redundant because a tool like column(1) could be >> used to do the same job (even though column(1) isn't POSIX). > > Neither would this ls(1) be. Of course. ;) > -S isn't POSIX. And to implement it without an option would mean > removing -h. -h is a gnuism, isn't it? https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/ls.html does specify the -S switch. That's POSIX, isn't it? > As I mentioned earlier, -t can't be done by a filter without > significantly modifying the timestamp output. That was my rationale > for the -D option, which allows sorting by an external filter. Understandable. Honestly if the date format weren't standardized as it were, I would've standardized on "yyyy-mm-dd,mm:ss" - which wouldn't need special processing in order to pump into sort(1). >> I felt -c and -u were meaningless, but that's because of the filesystems I >> usually work with that do not have functional equivalents. -u for one is >> completely useless on VFAT even though it has such timestamps! YMMV. > > I think this says more about your file systems than about the options. > I find both incredibly useful, and there's no easy way to get the > information elsewhere. stat(1) would be an option, but then that > could replace ls(1) completely. Perhaps true. > So, any others? > > -G: Colorized output. I'd be *really* happy to get rid of this, but > it's not easy to instate with a filter, so I suppose there are > enough people who like it that it will have to stay. > > -P: Seems only to be there to cancel a -H or -L. > > -W: "Display whiteouts when scanning directories". I don't even > understand what that is. I was using the link I referenced as my "standard", which doesn't have any of those. I can take or leave color ls. I don't like the GNU defaults because dark blue is TOO dark on my default settings. I think the flags are adequate to know what kind of file I'm dealing with. > -f: We haven't really discussed this one. If you want to remove -S, > -r and -t, then arguably -f should become the default and be > -removed. I used to use "dir|sort" a lot on PC DOS before it got "dir /o" in 5.0. I wouldn't have a problem with removing sort from ls altogether. > Of course, none of this will happen. But it is interesting to think > about it. In particular, options like -g and -o, which are no longer > modern. -uso.