Re: ls -l --no-total

2005-02-28 Thread P
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The POSIX specification requires that the prompt be issued to stderr:- Fair enough. Thanks for the info. What my patch essentially did was: if (isatty(stderr)) { /* interactive */ human=open("/dev/tty"); fcntl(human,F_SETFD,FD_CLOEXEC); } else { human=stderr; }

Re: ls -l --no-total

2005-02-28 Thread James Youngman
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 10:06:23AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Felipe Kellermann wrote: > >On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 5:39am +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > > > > > >> > Did I mention ls should have a --no-total option > >> > to remove those annoying > >> > total 1120 > >> > without needing to

Re: ls -l --no-total

2005-02-28 Thread P
Felipe Kellermann wrote: On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 5:39am +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > Did I mention ls should have a --no-total option > to remove those annoying > total 1120 > without needing to pipe to a filter. Another possibility would be to output the `total' to stderr. The horror,

Re: ls -l --no-total

2005-02-26 Thread Felipe Kellermann
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 5:39am +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: >> Did I mention ls should have a --no-total option >> to remove those annoying >> total 1120 >> without needing to pipe to a filter. > >Another possibility would be to output the `total' to stderr. > > The horror, wh

Re: ls -l --no-total

2005-02-26 Thread Alfred M. Szmidt
I've seen other programs printing only informative messages to stderr. Depends on what you call a "informative message", a warning should go to stderr. Normal output should go to stdout. `total ' is normal output, hence it should go to stdout. I know this behavior is standardized b

Re: ls -l --no-total

2005-02-25 Thread Alfred M. Szmidt
> Did I mention ls should have a --no-total option > to remove those annoying > total 1120 > without needing to pipe to a filter. Another possibility would be to output the `total' to stderr. The horror, why do people come up with these silly ideas? `total N' is not a error me

Re: ls -l --no-total

2005-02-25 Thread Felipe Kellermann
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 6:37am +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote: > Did I mention ls should have a --no-total option > to remove those annoying > total 1120 > without needing to pipe to a filter. Another possibility would be to output the `total' to stderr. -- Felipe Kellermann _

ls -l --no-total

2005-02-25 Thread Dan Jacobson
Did I mention ls should have a --no-total option to remove those annoying total 1120 without needing to pipe to a filter. ___ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils