Re: Size for Size is too small (ls/du)

Hi




> You wanted it included, not me.  I'm just telling you what you should
> do to make Jim happy. =)

I don't WANT it to be included. It was a suggestion, nothing more, nothing
less.

> Some more nitpicks, I don't think this option deserves an short
> option.

EOT.

>  And maybe you could make the long option take an argument? I.e.
> something like --broader-size=12, this way you won't hit a "limit", and
> you give the user freedom to pick her own preference. Also, the option
> name sucks, it should be something more descriptive, maybe --size-width?

Let's wait until someone implements.

--output-format='%f %s[..]'
(See "find" for all the options that should be there)




Bis denn

-- 
Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as
bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer
wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated,
cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous.