Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 21:26:15 -0600 From: Paul Smith <paul.j.smith0@gmail.com> To: "Dr. Andreas Haakh" <bugReporter@ib-haakh.de> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: a bug in /bin/ls Message-ID: <CACoaAtPak43P9N%2BhcjXWAm2rdFAA5Z8NXAnaxxTcvy5Lxod4fQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <55CD23C7.9010803@ib-haakh.de> References: <55CD23C7.9010803@ib-haakh.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Dr. Andreas Haakh <bugReporter@ib-haakh.de> wrote: > On: > FreeBSD Crabberio.Haakh.de 10.2-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 10.2-PRERELEASE #0 > r286580: Mon Aug 10 19:49:05 CEST 2015 > toor@Crabberio.Haakh.de:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CRABBERIO amd64 > > using the "-U"-flag in /bin/ls together with "-l" > leads to the following output > [...] > -rwxr--r-- 1 krabbe ibh 798720 1 Jan 1970 IMAG1562.jpg > -rw-r--r-- 1 krabbe ibh 579493 1 Jan 1970 IMAG1714.jpg > [...] > > and the sorting is not affected by the flag (still by name). > > >From the man page: -U Use time when file was created for sorting or printing. -u Use time of last access, instead of time of last modification of the file for sorting (-t) or printing (-l). -t Sort by descending time modified (most recently modified first). . . . Does something like ls -Ult give you what you want? My interpretation is that -u and -U need to be combined with -t or -l. I think the -c option works the same way. Did you get different output on a previous FreeBSD version? Paul
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACoaAtPak43P9N%2BhcjXWAm2rdFAA5Z8NXAnaxxTcvy5Lxod4fQ>