Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Instead of adding a new option, I think I'd rather change 'sort' to > cater to your (relatively common) case, rather than to the (relatively > contrived) cases like `cat F | sort -m -o F - G' where people should > know that they're getting into trouble anyway. > > Here's a proposed patch to solve your problem that way instead. > > 2004-05-13 Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Improve performance of `sort -m' on large files, at the cost of > making some contrived examples unsafe. POSIX allows this > optimization. Performance problem reported by Jonathan Baker in > <http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2004-05/msg00071.html>. > > * src/sort.c (first_same_file): Do not treat input pipes > differently from other files. > * doc/coreutils.texi (sort invocation): Document that "sort -m -o F" > might write F before reading all the input. > * NEWS: Likewise.
Applied. Thanks! _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
