bug#49716: no -print0 for ls?

[Pádraig Brady]

On 28/07/2021 02:14, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 7/26/21 8:00 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>
> > So I'd have a slight preference for --zero.
> >
> > Also what about having --zero imply:
> >     --quoting-style=literal --show-control-chars --format=single-column
> > That seems like a fine shortcut given that would be correct in the vast
> > majority of cases,
> > and that the need for the above may not be obvious to users.
> >
> > Also a small point; should --dired disable --null as it may then be non
> > parseable?
>
> Thanks, all good suggestions. For --dired vs --zero I thought it better
> simply to prohibit the combination since neither should be in 'ls' shell
> aliases, and prohibiting means we can add it later if we like. I
> installed the attached patches to do this (plus the other stuff I
> mentioned in my reply to Berny).
>
> The first patch is a cleanup because I had a bit of trouble following
> the forest of 'if's inside of ls.c's decode_switches function and I
> thought it better to avoid unnecessary syscalls while I was at it.
>
> The second patch does the real work.

That all looks great.

I see --zero implies --format=single-column, but allows --format=long.
That's the right default, but also most flexible.

I'll apply the attached later to augment/document the test
with the various supported option combinations.

thanks!
Pádraig

ls--zero-tests.patch
Description: Text Data