Re: tail: somewhat unexpected one-by-one in -c/-n +NUM option

2023-07-19 Thread Pádraig Brady
On 19/07/2023 15:32, Martin Castillo wrote: Hi, I noticed an asymmetry between head and tail regarding the -n +N syntax of tail. For context, I was calculating checksums of 1 GiB chunks of a big file a la: for i in $(seq 500); do head -c 1G | sha1sum >chunk-$i.sha1; done < bigfile This was int

Re: tail: somewhat unexpected one-by-one in -c/-n +NUM option

2023-07-19 Thread Dragan Simic
On 2023-07-19 16:32, Martin Castillo wrote: This should be documented a bit more clearly and maybe be included in the gotchas list. I just prepared a patch that improves the way this behavior is documented. I'll send this patch as part of a patch series I'm currently working on. I assume,

Re: tail: somewhat unexpected one-by-one in -c/-n +NUM option

2023-07-19 Thread Dragan Simic
On 2023-07-19 16:32, Martin Castillo wrote: I assume, this is because lines are numbered one-based, so this is more intuitive to use. But when working with bytes, one usually uses offsets. Is there a more intuitive way to get the last part of a file given an offset? You may want to have a look

tail: somewhat unexpected one-by-one in -c/-n +NUM option

2023-07-19 Thread Martin Castillo
Hi, I noticed an asymmetry between head and tail regarding the -n +N syntax of tail. For context, I was calculating checksums of 1 GiB chunks of a big file a la: for i in $(seq 500); do head -c 1G | sha1sum >chunk-$i.sha1; done < bigfile This was interrupted and I tried to continue by prepend