Re: ls --dired : be more proactive with errors [was: Re: ls/test: verify the output of ls --dired]

[Pádraig Brady]

On 17/09/2023 15:00, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Le 15/09/2023 à 14:53, Pádraig Brady a écrit :
> > On 14/09/2023 23:05, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > Currently, GNU coreutils doesn't have any test verifying the actual
> > > output of ls --dired.
> > >
> > > It should generate a list of position (pairs).
> > >
> > > //DIRED// 73 82 142 152 ...
> > >
> > > The attached patch creates 2 files and one directory and verify that we
> > > can find their names using the position.
> >
> > Well the existing test did verify --dired output offsets,
> > albeit constant offsets from the non varying output.
> Thanks.
>
> Here is a second patch to improve the error management.
> Currently, "ls --dired" silently fails
>
> I implemented the first suggestion in the FIXME.

Yes silently ignoring --dired isn't ideal.

However I'm thinking --dired implying -l,
and taking precedence if specified last
would be preferable?

That's done in the attached.

cheers,
Pádraig

ls-dired-precedence.patch
Description: Text Data