Re: chgrp and chown should support -L, -H, -P per POSIX/SUSv3

2003-10-01 Thread Jim Meyering
Tobias Burnus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > chown (coreutils) 5.0.90 > chgrp (coreutils) 5.0.90 > > don't support the -L, -H and -P options which are required by SUSv3. > (By the way, those options _are_ supported by "cp".) Thanks for the suggestion. They're coming soon, along with rewrites to mak

Re: NMERGE hardcoded in sort.c

2003-10-01 Thread Andrew D Jewell
Absolutely. How do I do that? adj At 3:32 PM -0700 10/1/03, Paul Eggert wrote: Andrew D Jewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: You can get our version of coreutils 4.5.3 from http://alexautils.sourceforge.net/ I haven't had a chance to look at the code, but from the description it looks like some

Re: NMERGE hardcoded in sort.c

2003-10-01 Thread Paul Courbis
Unfortunately your download link gives : Not Found The requested URL /coreutils-4.5.3-alexa03.tar.gz was not found on this server. Apache/1.3.26 Server at alexautils.sourceforge.net Port 80 :-( Regards Paul On

chgrp and chown should support -L, -H, -P per POSIX/SUSv3

2003-10-01 Thread Tobias Burnus
Hi, chown (coreutils) 5.0.90 chgrp (coreutils) 5.0.90 don't support the -L, -H and -P options which are required by SUSv3. (By the way, those options _are_ supported by "cp".) Please implement them. Best regards, Tobias -H If the -R option is specified and a symbolic link referencing a

Re: bug in /bin/ls

2003-10-01 Thread Steven Augart
Dear Craig Bourne, I am unable to reproduce the problem on a stock Red Hat 9 installation. First, are you sure you're running Red Hat 9.0 (I'm sorry if this sounds dumb)?  The system I'm on has kernel version 2.4.20-18.9, not 2.4.20-6, and was compiled on May 29, 2003, not on Feb 27. ls --versi

Re: bug in /bin/ls

2003-10-01 Thread Steven Augart
I have been working with the bug reporter.  I believe he somehow got his system in an odd state where it was using the ls from fileutils 4.0x instead of the ls from coreutils 4.5.3, which Red Hat 9 ships with. I don't think it's worth chasing this one, since I did a little search on google for "

Re: NMERGE hardcoded in sort.c

2003-10-01 Thread Andrew D Jewell
Sorry, it should have been 4.5.4. I've fixed the page. adj At 9:30 PM +0200 10/1/03, Paul Courbis wrote: Unfortunately your download link gives : Not Found The requested URL /coreutils-4.5.3-alexa03.tar.gz was not found on this server. --

Re: NMERGE hardcoded in sort.c

2003-10-01 Thread Paul Eggert
Andrew D Jewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > You can get our version of coreutils 4.5.3 from > http://alexautils.sourceforge.net/ I haven't had a chance to look at the code, but from the description it looks like some of those changes would be very nice to fold into GNU coreutils. Would you be

Re: bug in /bin/ls

2003-10-01 Thread Paul Eggert
Sorry, but it looks to me like your host has been rootkitted. If so, it's probably time to reinstall from scratch, and to do a better job of securing it next time. ___ Bug-coreutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bu

Re: du -x option doesn't work

2003-10-01 Thread Paul Eggert
erno palonheimo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > i noticed that -x option of du, which is supposed to make it stay > inside one filesystem, doesn't apparently do anything. It works for me, with CVS coreutils and Linux kernel 2.4.18-bf2.4, when I use "du -x /". Possibly the bug has been fixed since

Re: du -x option doesn't work

2003-10-01 Thread Jim Meyering
erno palonheimo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i noticed that -x option of du, which is supposed to make it stay > inside one filesystem, doesn't apparently do anything. > > # du --version > du (coreutils) 5.0.90 Please give more details, but note that people often misunderstand how this option work

Re: bug in /bin/ls

2003-10-01 Thread Jim Meyering
Craig Bourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am running RedHat Linux 9.0 > Linux version 2.4.20-6 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version > 3.2.2 20030222 (Red Hat Linux 3.2.2-5)) #1 Thu Feb 27 10:06:59 EST 2003 > > I find that files which have names starting with the characters hp are > invisible to /bin/

Re: Suggested Addition to the "ls" command

2003-10-01 Thread Paul Jarc
Scott Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'd really like a simple way to JUST list all the directories in a > given directory. $ ls -d */ paul ___ Bug-coreutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils

dd displaying stats in a human readable form

2003-10-01 Thread Olivier Delhomme
Hi, As Paul Eggert said, we could display really readable stats for dd while still using the mechanism of SIGUSR1 : >in the normal case where bytes-read equals bytes-written (in this >case, 2.7 GB) and there are no partial blocks. The less common cases >could use more-unusual formats, e.g.: > >

Re: NMERGE hardcoded in sort.c

2003-10-01 Thread Andrew D Jewell
You can get our version of coreutils 4.5.3 from http://alexautils.sourceforge.net/ We've had good results with NMERGE up around 1000 The merge code in standard sort is O(NMERGE * total_lines) which is already bad at 16 and terrible if you get much higher. The alexautils code has different merg

Re: Suggested Addition to the "ls" command

2003-10-01 Thread Steven Augart
I read the discussion you mentioned.  I wouldn't implement it just because I found "ls [whatever options you usually use] -d target-directory/*/" to do this nicely.  (Actually, if you're just looking for names, then "echo target-directory/*/" will do fine without the overhead of launching ls).   P