On Sat, Jun 19, 2004 at 11:47:21AM -0700, Tim Kientzle wrote:
> Scott Mitchell wrote:
> >
> >ls(1) says that the -t option will:
> >
> > Sort by time modified (most recently modified first) before sort-
> > ing the operands by lexicographical order.
> >
> >... the attached patch produces the expected output. I can commit it if
> >there
> >are no objections.
>
> Looks good to me. I wonder if the time sorting should
> include the nanos field as well. (Mostly on FreeBSD,
> the nanos field is zero, but not always.)
I don't see why not, unless some standard requires the nanos to be
ignored. That would be pretty strange though...
> Of course, sorting on the (non-displayed) nanos field
> could also produce such unexpected output as you describe.
I guess you'd want yet another option to display the full-resolution
timestamp, if you were going to sort on the whole thing. And you'd still
want to use the name to break ties.
Scott
--
===========================================================================
Scott Mitchell | PGP Key ID | "Eagles may soar, but weasels
Cambridge, England | 0x54B171B9 | don't get sucked into jet engines"
scott at fishballoon.org | 0xAA775B8B | -- Anon
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
