On 2009-01-26_2152.52, Bob Proulx wrote: > Paul E Condon wrote: > > My suggestion is that the software also rename the earlier backup > > files as follows: In each name, insert the digit zero (0) in front of > > the digit [1-9]. This will preserve the correct display order of the > > backups in a simple invocation of "ls -l" . This will make for a > > more cleanly ordered display up to 99 backups. > > Are you aware of the -v sort by version option for ls? This will > usually sort the display as you desire by treating the filenames as > versioned named. > > ls -logv > > Does that do what you want? > > You can read more about version sorting in the ls documentation. > > info coreutils 'Sorting the output' > > Bob >
Yes. It is a better solution than what I was suggesting. I now need an excuse for not thinking to look in info coreutils and only looking in info ls, which is just a repeat of the man page on my machine. Is that because I'm running Debian? But no excuses. coreutils is the greatest! Thanks. -- Paul E Condon [email protected] _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
