coreutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH] ls: Clarify the effect of option -k


From: Pádraig Brady
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ls: Clarify the effect of option -k
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 17:21:03 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0

On 03/12/17 08:12, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Pádraig,
> 
> On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 16:37:02 -0800, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> On 01/12/17 02:26, Jean Delvare wrote:
>>> Users may expect a different effect from option -k than is actually
>>> implemented, especially when the effect of that option has changed
>>> over time. The info page explains it well, but "ls --help" (and thus
>>> the ls.1 man page) do not.
>>>
>>> * src/ls.c: Improve the description of option -k.
>>> ---
>>>  src/ls.c |   10 +++++++++-
>>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> --- coreutils.orig/src/ls.c 2017-12-01 10:14:46.297551197 +0100
>>> +++ coreutils/src/ls.c      2017-12-01 10:45:17.298050350 +0100
>>> @@ -5203,7 +5203,15 @@ Sort entries alphabetically if none of -
>>>    -i, --inode                print the index number of each file\n\
>>>    -I, --ignore=PATTERN       do not list implied entries matching shell 
>>> PATTERN\
>>>  \n\
>>> -  -k, --kibibytes            default to 1024-byte blocks for disk usage\n\
>>> +"), stdout);
>>> +      fputs (_("\
>>> +  -k, --kibibytes            default to 1024-byte blocks for disk usage;\n\
>>> +                               affects the per-directory block count 
>>> written by\
>>> +\n\
>>> +                               -l and -s, and the size written by -s, but 
>>> not\
>>> +\n\
>>> +                               the file size written by -l (use\n\
>>> +                               '--block-size=1024' for that)\n\
>>>  "), stdout);
>>>        fputs (_("\
>>>    -l                         use a long listing format\n\
>>>
>>>   
>>
>>
>> Way too verbose.
> 
> And you didn't see my first attempt, which was even longer ;-) I
> expected some conciseness was desirable.
> 
> That being said... "too verbose" according to what?

Well brevity is much appreciated
as indicated by efforts such as https://tldr.sh/

> The description of
> --time-style is longer that than, and those of -c, --time and
> --quoting-style come close.

Indeed. The attached reorganizes --time-style too.

cheers,
Pádraig

Attachment: ls--help.patch
Description: Text Data


reply via email to

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