Thanks for contributing! Some comments:
Internally, file time stamps should be maintained to nanosecond
resolution, not just 1-second resolution.
As far as the --last-modified option syntax goes, I suggest that
we use a syntax that is more like that of "touch --time". E.g.,
du --last-time='modify'
The default operand for --last-time would be 'modify' (or its alias
'mtime'), but the user could aso specify --last-time='access' (or its
alias 'atime' or 'use') or --last-time='change' (or its alias
'ctime').
For consistency the time stamp format option should use the same
option syntax as 'ls'. E.g.,
du --last-time='modify' --time-style='+%Y-%m-%d'
I suggest using the 'long-iso' time style as the default format, e.g.,
"2004-10-02 15:30". This would be the default for "ls" if it weren't
for POSIX requirements; but since we are inventing an extension to
"du" we can use 'long-iso'. There's no real need to put that ugly "T"
in the output.
William Brendling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] last modified dates, displaying in @command{du}
> +Show the most recent last modified date of any of the files in the
That language is a bit hard to parse. How about if you change "last
modified date" to "time of last data modification"? That's what it
actually is. This might require some rewording I suppose.
_______________________________________________
Bug-coreutils mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
