On 23/08/15 03:08, Beco wrote: > > > On 22 August 2015 at 22:37, Paul Eggert <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > That's annoying. Thanks for the bug report. I'm a bit dubious about > equating zero to infinity, though, so I installed the attached patch instead. > It will let you use whatever large number you like. E.g.: > > ls -w999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 > > will do the right thing. For now, you can work around the problem with: > > ls -w4294967295 > > which should work on unpatched GNU ‘ls’. > > > Hello, Paul, > > Thanks for the quick answer. > > Regarding the zero being infinity, well, it doesn't need to be zero. > > But a shortcut would be nice. For example, instead of: > > ls -w999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 > > it could be ls -wMAX > > I thought about zero because: > > 1- its a number, easier to implement (than parsing a word like MAX) > 2- its not being used (gives an error if you try) (*) > > Its just that a script with so many 99..99 numbers would be hard to read, > nothing more. > > Ty, > Beco > > -- > (*) Debian Jessie: > $ ls -m -w0 > ls: invalid line width: 0 > $ ls -m -w18446744073709551616 > ls: invalid line width: 18446744073709551616 > $ ls -m -w18446744073709551615 > (runs ok, no error)
I agree. I don't think -w0 would be useful for anything else. I.E. considering 0 as no width limit is quite natural. Also base64 -w0 has similar meaning. cheers, Pádraig.
