On 12/01/2010 06:44 AM, Kielbasiewicz, Peter wrote:
> Hello,
> there seems to be a bug in Ubuntu's 10.10 sort command.
> I suspect that it defaults to the -f option now which I think is wrong.
Thanks for the report. However, this is not a bug in sort, but a
problem of your current choice of lo
"sort --help" says:
*** WARNING ***
The locale specified by the environment affects sort order.
Set LC_ALL=C to get the traditional sort order that uses
native byte values.
and this most likely explains your situation.
[re-adding the list]
On 12/01/2010 09:24 AM, nik...@email.com wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
>
> As much as I would love to contribute code to the open source community,
> unfortunately I have no idea how to code.
Even so, your suggestions in English are a good start for telling us
what you found to be la
>> > I've gotta give it to Microsoft, they get their manuals right.
Sorry, but I had to laugh at that one.
Here's a quote from a Microsoft manual on this very topic:
chmod A UNIX command meaning "change module."
which is bogus, of course: even someone with only passing acquaintance
with chm
X-Debbugs-cc: bug-coreutils@gnu.org, bug-m...@gnu.org
Package: coreutils
Version: 8.5-1
man cp says:
`-u'
`--update'
Do not copy a non-directory that has an existing destination with
the same or newer modification time. If time stamps are being
preserved, the comparison is to the s
Good eye! Thanks for the bug report and example. I installed
the following one-byte patch into gnulib; please give it a try.
It should propagate into coreutils the next time coreutils
updates from gnulib.
A test case for this would require two file systems, one with
finer-grained time stamps tha
On 11/30/2010 10:16 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Invoke MAX_MERGE(total, level) with level == 15.
> 2 << level yields 65536, and 65536 * 65536 overflows to zero.
I managed to reproduce this bug on a (faked) host with
32768 processors, using a command like this:
seq 10 | sort --parallel=327
