> Hmm. The filename space is kinda overloaded there with those
> TID ranges. Do we even need TID ranges? A person could simply sort
> the output and pick out what he wanted.
Yes certainly all the info can be parsed out of the current output,
I just consider it good practice to have it a
Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 11:14:16 +0800
Bill Hacker wrote:
All-numeral dating might be more human-language independent, and an
input-format reminder built-in, as in:
--startDDMM=20092008 --endDDMM=01012009
For all numeric it's probably best to use ISO86
On Tue, 17 Feb 2009 11:14:16 +0800
Bill Hacker wrote:
> All-numeral dating might be more human-language independent, and an
> input-format reminder built-in, as in:
>
> --startDDMM=20092008 --endDDMM=01012009
For all numeric it's probably best to use ISO8601 formats like
mm
Matthew Dillon wrote:
:Hi again,
*trimmed*
If you wanted to get really fancy you could also implement date ranges.
hammer --start-date=20-Sep-2008 --end-date=01-Jan-2009 ...
-Matt
Yes, PLEASE!
More work - one time.
But bound to
:Hi again,
:after some hours of sleep I took a look into the hammer sources and
:pushed my code in there.
:If anybody else cares about this option, the patch is attached to this mail.
:You can then basically use:
:
:> hammer history-count fname
:
:to only display a count (I did not care about any
Hi again,
after some hours of sleep I took a look into the hammer sources and
pushed my code in there.
If anybody else cares about this option, the patch is attached to this mail.
You can then basically use:
> hammer history-count fname
to only display a count (I did not care about any formattin
Hi all,
I came across a feature that was not implemented and that I desperately needed
yesterday,
while fixing a companys backup server.
Sometimes it is extremely useful to be able to list all versions of a bunch of
files.
For this purpose there exists the hamer history command.
If you however
