James Youngman <[email protected]> writes: > I like the idea, and the added support for field widths could be useful. > > > > I would also suggest reverting the change in findutils-4.3.3 that %TT > > and %TS print nanosecond resolution. This change makes it difficult > > to only print the seconds in the minute without nanoseconds. With > > this patch the user could then achieve the same effect using %TT.%TN > > or %TS.%TN, respecitvely. > > Perhaps this would have been a better way to do things in the first > place, but I'm a bit reluctant to simply revert the change in case > someone is relying on it (since this approach also gives no transition > path).
Since there weren't apparently any objections to change the behavior when 4.3.3 was released I wonder why there's now reluctance to revert the change. The forward change did not even include a way to get the old output, e.g. there was no way to print the seconds in the minute without nanoseconds. My patch provides both possibilities using either %TS or %TS.%TN. > Do you have any suggestions for how we should proceed in making this > change? One could add an environment variable to control whether the behavior of findutils-4.3.3 or the older/newer behavior is desired. This would be very easy since we would only need to set different nstrftime() format strings for %TT and %TS. BTW, in the meantime I have made the patch against the git repository which has changed considerably since the last release. urs
