Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Kamil Dudka
On Tuesday 02 September 2008 16:01:13 you wrote: > Would you please amend/squash the patch below into your patch and > adjust the line lengths of the log message to be <= 72, so that > the generated ChangeLog lines don't wrap? No problem, here is (I hope) complete patch. Also thanks for the regexp,

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Andreas Schwab
Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > @@ -247,6 +254,41 @@ df_readable (bool negative, uintmax_t n, char *buf, > } > } > > +/* Logical equivalence */ > +#define LOG_EQ(a, b) (!(a) == !(b)) > + > +/* Add integral value while using uintmax_t for value part and separate > + negation fla

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Kamil Dudka
On Wednesday 03 September 2008 11:03:22 you wrote: > Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Since both arguments are already bool I see no need for LOG_EQ (it's the > only use anyway). If you are using type bool, there is no guarantee there will be bool (0/1) value inside. It ca be (and mostly

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Andreas Schwab
Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wednesday 03 September 2008 11:03:22 you wrote: >> Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Since both arguments are already bool I see no need for LOG_EQ (it's the >> only use anyway). > If you are using type bool, there is no guarantee there will be

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Jim Meyering
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On Wednesday 03 September 2008 11:03:22 you wrote: >>> Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> Since both arguments are already bool I see no need for LOG_EQ (it's the >>> only use anyway). >> If you are usin

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Kamil Dudka
On Wednesday 03 September 2008 11:18:37 you wrote: > Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Wednesday 03 September 2008 11:03:22 you wrote: > >> Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Since both arguments are already bool I see no need for LOG_EQ (it's the > >> only use anyway). > > >

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Andreas Schwab
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> On Wednesday 03 September 2008 11:03:22 you wrote: Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Since both arguments are already bool I see no need for LOG_EQ (i

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Jim Meyering
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: On Wednesday 03 September 2008 11:03:22 you wrote: > Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Since both argume

Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

2008-09-03 Thread Ondřej Vašík
Hello, as reported in RH bugzilla #253817 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253817), there is an issue with ls -v (and there will be same issue with sort -V soon). Problem is with sorting files with extensions or dist-tags (like .tar.gz) because .tar.gz is more than .1.tar.gz. Therefore

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

2008-09-03 Thread Bruno Haible
Ondřej Vašík wrote: > as reported in RH bugzilla #253817 > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253817), there is an issue > with ls -v (and there will be same issue with sort -V soon). Problem is > with sorting files with extensions or dist-tags (like .tar.gz) > because .tar.gz is more tha

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Andreas Schwab
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I presume you're referring to uses of "bool" variables > like these (there are many more): I'm referring to the use of the very same variables that are used in the patch. If those are not pure boolean then you have a bug anyway. Andreas. -- Andreas S

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

2008-09-03 Thread Ondřej Vašík
Bruno Haible wrote: > Ondřej Vašík wrote: > > 3) to use/create different function for handling version sort (like > > rpmvercmp in recommended in glibc strverscmp() bugzilla) > > Does rpmvercmp have the above property? Similar. It separates name, epoch, version, release and architecture and comp

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Jim Meyering
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I presume you're referring to uses of "bool" variables >> like these (there are many more): > > I'm referring to the use of the very same variables that are used in the > patch. If those are not pure boolean

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Andreas Schwab
Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> I presume you're referring to uses of "bool" variables >>> like these (there are many more): >> >> I'm referring to the use of the very same variables that are us

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

2008-09-03 Thread Simon Josefsson
Ondřej Vašík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bruno Haible wrote: >> Ondřej Vašík wrote: >> > 3) to use/create different function for handling version sort (like >> > rpmvercmp in recommended in glibc strverscmp() bugzilla) >> >> Does rpmvercmp have the above property? > > Similar. It separates nam

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

2008-09-03 Thread Kamil Dudka
I propose a simple patch for gnulib/strverscmp, which make this function much more useful. Note that this patch is not related to any distribution. It just cut off any postfix after version string. Current version of coreutils uses strverscmp from gnulib, so if you want to test this patch, you

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Jim Meyering
Kamil Dudka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 02 September 2008 16:01:13 you wrote: >> Would you please amend/squash the patch below into your patch and >> adjust the line lengths of the log message to be <= 72, so that >> the generated ChangeLog lines don't wrap? > No problem, here is (I hop

Re: Bug#497514: coreutils: chmod, chown, and chgrp change ctime even when no change was necessary

2008-09-03 Thread Erik Rossen
I asked the people on the mailing list of our local LUG to test if chmod changes ctime on non-GNU systems even when there is no difference beteen the mode before and after the chmod. From these few data, the trend seems to be that ctime gets changed. Here are the results thus far (identified by "

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Eric Blake
> > > > I'm referring to the use of the very same variables that are used in the > > patch. If those are not pure boolean then you have a bug anyway. > > Here are some of the changes needed to protect against the substandard > "bool" problem we're talking about. Some of the changes (& => &&) > a

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Jim Meyering
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Blake) wrote: >> > I'm referring to the use of the very same variables that are used in the >> > patch. If those are not pure boolean then you have a bug anyway. >> >> Here are some of the changes needed to protect against the substandard >> "bool" problem we're talking abo

Uniq is so tilted to "first"

2008-09-03 Thread jidanni
Uniq is so tilted to "first" $ man uniq|grep compar.*first avoid comparing the first N fields avoid comparing the first N characters $ man uniq|grep -c last 0 All so inflexible. There should be a more general way with ranges. ___

test -t

2008-09-03 Thread jidanni
On (info "(coreutils)File type tests", and test(1) man page, we see `-t FD' True if FD is a file descriptor that is associated with a terminal. Well please mention what happens if FD is omitted: $ test -t The answer is it always returns true, no matter what. Test with $ echo 'set -x; for

Re: [PATCH] df: new option: --total (-c) to produce grand total (in the same way as du)

2008-09-03 Thread Bruno Haible
Jim Meyering wrote: > Other opinions welcome. I mostly agree with Eric here: gnulib's substitute does not guarantee that values stored in a 'bool' are either 0 or 1, therefore the code that creates 'bool' values must guarantee it. > The question is how best to *maintain* the precondition in > the

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

2008-09-03 Thread Bruno Haible
Kamil Dudka wrote: > I propose a simple patch for gnulib/strverscmp, which make this function much > more useful. We cannot take this patch, as the gnulib strverscmp function is meant to be a substitute for the glibc function of the same name. (Sorry, the doc was not clear about it until today.)

Re: Issue with ls -v / sort -V and strverscmp() usage

2008-09-03 Thread Bruno Haible
Ondřej Vašík wrote: > > Does rpmvercmp have the above property? > > Similar. It separates name, epoch, version, release and architecture and > compares those. Uses subsections of alphanum segments separated by > non-alphanum chars. When same segment have different types, numeric is > always consid

date -u vs. CST

2008-09-03 Thread jidanni
$ for i in E C M P; do for i in ${i}ST; do echo -n $i:; date -ud "7:00 $i"; done; done EST:Wed Sep 3 12:00:00 UTC 2008 CST:Wed Sep 3 13:00:00 UTC 2008 MST:Wed Sep 3 14:00:00 UTC 2008 PST:Wed Sep 3 15:00:00 UTC 2008 $ for i in E C M P; do for i in ${i}ST; do echo -n $i:; date -d "7:00 $i"; do

Re: test -t

2008-09-03 Thread Paul Jarc
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On (info "(coreutils)File type tests", and test(1) man page, we see > `-t FD' >True if FD is a file descriptor that is associated with a terminal. > > Well please mention what happens if FD is omitted: bash's "help test" explains this, if you know where to look

Re: test -t

2008-09-03 Thread Chet Ramey
Paul Jarc wrote: > Similar language is in bash's man page and coreutils' info > documentation. But it wouldn't hurt to add a note to indicate that if > no operand is provided, then "-t" and other operators stop being > operators, and are tested as plain strings. This is covered in the man page a

bug report in df

2008-09-03 Thread Yochai Meir
Hey, I think I found a bug in the df command. I was searching for information to manage my data and then I saw this FilesystemSize Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda5 23G 23G 71M 100% /media/DOWNLOADS the program reporting that is uses 100% of the place when in fac