For those of you following this exciting thread, here's the final
answer:
The specification '-k1.4' does not mean what I thought.
I though it meant
'the fourth character of the first field'
what it really means is
'the fourth character after the start of the first field. A
character tha
, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Andy Jewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Here are the commands, and the expected output. (The tests are 10f
and
10g).
sort -t : -k 1.3,1.3
:ba
:ab
sort -k 1.4,1.4
b ba
a ab
In both of these cases it seems that the explicit -k matches an empty
string,
The
In the test suite for sort (coreutils 6.9), there are two tests that
seem to be testing for incorrect behavior.
I'm hoping someone will help me understand why the behavior in the
test is correct.
Here are the commands, and the expected output. (The tests are 10f and
10g).
sort -t : -k
