bug#21218: ls -d

[Sneeh, Eddie]

Ah yes -do is the same as -d -o, overlooked that.  Looks like most the alphabet is already taken, o is taken, n is taken, l is taken, is y still available? (Am I seeing this right, only -e and -y are still unused?)

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Eric Blake <address@hidden> wrote:

On 08/10/2015 01:09 PM, Sneeh, Eddie wrote:

> Since these switches are already taken to do other things, what do you
> think about this:
> % ls -fo (list files only)
> % ls -lo (list links only)
> % ls -do (list directories only)

Won't work.  'ls -o' is already a valid command, so 'ls -fo' is the same
as 'ls -o -f' or 'ls -f -o'.  You can't start a long-option name with a
single dash; at least, not in coreutils which uses getopt_long() (there
are some exceptions, like gcc, which use getopt_long_only() for
historical reasons, and which therefore can spell long options with a
single dash if there is no ambiguity, but use of getopt_long_only() is
not recommended in new programs).

--
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

--

Best Regards,

Eddie Sneeh