Am Sonntag, 10. Januar 2016, 22:43:00 CET schrieb James Youngman:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Bernhard Voelker
> <m...@bernhard-voelker.de> wrote:
> > On 01/09/2016 04:41 PM, James Youngman wrote:
> >> Let's re-open the discussion about what to call the "sane" alternative to
> >> -size, and implement it this time.
> >
> > I'm not so enthusiastic,
> [...]
> > I'd rather suggest to re-work the --help output to explain every single
> > option rather than just mentioning them as today. The usage text via --help
> > is the first thing a user tries to read when {s,}he's unsure. With the
> > longer format, we'd have the chance to avoid confusion at the first place
> > the user is looking for.
> > And IMHO using a text based on that of the POSIX spec for the -size option
> > would be the best I could think of.
>
> Suppose someone wants to find files smaller than 20MiB. Are you sure
> that the best answer we should give them is that they should use
> "find -size -20971520c"?
Wouldn´t
find -size -21M
work as well? Even with integer numbers 20 is smaller than 21.
So or so, the behaviour of find with size and time comparisions (other bug is
open about it) is user unfriendly and unintuitive. So if thats a standard,
then I´d say the standard is broke.
--
Martin Steigerwald | Consultant / Trainer
teamix GmbH
Südwestpark 43
90449 Nürnberg
Tel.: +49 911 30999 55 | Fax: +49 911 30999 99
mail: martin.steigerw...@teamix.de | web: http://www.teamix.de | blog:
http://blog.teamix.de
Amtsgericht Nürnberg, HRB 18320 | Geschäftsführer: Oliver Kügow, Richard Müller
teamix Support Hotline: +49 911 30999-112
*** Bitte liken Sie uns auf Facebook: facebook.com/teamix ***
