[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#49716: no -print0 for ls?

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: bug#49716: no -print0 for ls?
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2021 13:02:31 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0

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.

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."

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]