On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 04/17/2015 11:03 AM, Peng Yu wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> On 04/17/2015 10:10 AM, Peng Yu wrote: >>>> Hi, I got the following results when I call sort with -t /. It seems >>>> that 'a/1.txt' should be right after 'a'. Is it the case? Or I am not >>>> using sort correctly? >>> >>> Your assumption is correct - you are using sort incorrectly, by failing >>> to take locales into account, and by failing to limit the amount of data >>> being compared to single field widths. >> >> Thanks for the explanation. >> >> If I don't know the number of fields, but I want to sort according to >> all fields (from 1 to whatever the max number of fields), is there a >> way to do it? > > No one has really asked for that before. Are you going to propose some > possible extension syntax to make it obvious how to generate as many key > specifications as necessary to fully cover an arbitrary number of fields > in a line?
Since no -k options means treat each line just a whole string, maybe one can allow -k without specifying any columns as treating each line as all the set of fields in that line? -- Regards, Peng
