Re: ls.1: incorrect -O flag description

On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 05:35:11AM +0300, Valery Ushakov wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 21:37:15 +0200, [email protected] wrote:
> 
> > The -O (not a POSIX one) flag seems incorrectly described in the manual
> > page.
> > 
> > What it does (from a cursory look at the sources, matching the result
> > of testing), is simply not displaying a supplementary information
> > about the directory traversed when going recursive.
> > 
> > It does not output only leaf (filenames not directory). This is only
> > the "headline": "\ndir:\n" that is not displayed.
> > 
> > Just try:
> > 
> > $ ls -OF
> > 
> > for example (and combine with -R).
> > 
> > What was the intention of the flag? To have an output with just the
> > names (including directories) without the formatting about the newline
> > and the dir?
> 
> revision 1.71
> date: 2014-02-20 22:56:36 +0400;  author: christos;  state: Exp;  lines: +18 -8;
> Add -O (only leaf files) and -P (print full path), from tls@
> 
> Seems buggy too
> 
> $ mkdir -p 1/2/3/4
> $ touch 1/2/200
> $ find .
> .
> ./1
> ./1/2
> ./1/2/3
> ./1/2/3/4
> ./1/2/200
> $ ls -RPO
> ./1
> ./1/2
> ./1/2/200./1/2/3
> ./1/2/3/4
> 
> Can you file a PR, please? TIA.
> 

Done: bin/58740

And for me the solution is to suppress the flag altogether---what
the manpage says it is supposed to do can be done with find(1).
-- 
        Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ kergis +dot+ com>
                     http://www.kergis.com/
                    http://kertex.kergis.com/
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89  250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C