On 7/26/21 12:52 PM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
The following options don't work well with --null, because they output other, additional information or transform/escape the file names:
...
-l use a long listing format
I don't see a problem with -l, as --null can be a win with -l because file names are more-reliably parsed in output from -l --null than they are from plain -l.
More generally, I don't see a problem with -F, --file-type, --full-time, -g, --indicator-style, -i, -l, -n, -o, -p, -R, -s, or -Z. In all those cases it can be a win to use --null so that file names are unambiguous and easily parsed.
I do see a problem for -b, -C, --color, -q, -Q, --quoting-style, -x. Pádraig made a similar point. I'll look into this and into his other points.
this would IMO warrant a new utility rather than blowing ls(1).
Oh I don't know, ls seems to be a natural home for "Do what 'ls' does, except with NUL instead of newline."
