On 3/30/10 4:36 PM, Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 02:04:39PM -0600, Tim Haley wrote: >> It would be easy enough for me to print a 'time' column as the first >> column, and the output could then be sent to 'sort -n'. I'm not sure >> how people feel about that. Is that cheating? :-) The alternative >> is to AVL sort by that time, which as you note will increase the >> footprint, perhaps dramatically for a really big diff. > > I'd be happy with that. Someone suggested a -o field1,field2,..,fieldN
That would be me. > option, and that's starting to look desirable. There's at least these > fields that you could include in output: > > - object number > - object type > - timestamp* > - generation number > - type of change (create*, unlink*, rename*, other*, other meta-data, data) > - old path* > - new path* > - link count* > > The starred ones are the ones included in your proposals so far. I'd be > happy with just those; the others would be icing :) +1 g
