[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Findutils-patches] [PATCH] Add a -sort option to use fts's sorted t

From: Phil Miller
Subject: Re: [Findutils-patches] [PATCH] Add a -sort option to use fts's sorted traversal functionality
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 00:08:05 -0600

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Eric Blake <address@hidden> wrote:
On 12/29/2014 04:49 PM, Phil Miller wrote:
> * find/defs.h (struct options): Add a 'sort' flag.

A boolean flag is insufficient.  The default should remain unsorted, but
you should offer the ability to sort by either name or inode, which
means -sort needs to take an argument to say which sorting method to use.

The motivating use case for this patch is in enumerating files in a stable order, from <>. Sorting by inode doesn't offer that benefit, since it will vary every time a given tree is generated. I can imagine a potential performance benefit to downstream consumers in sorting by inode (putting subsequent disk access in roughly consecutive order), but I don't see much payoff in implementing it without some more concrete motivation.  That said, if it will smooth integration, it's easy enough for me to just go ahead and implement.

> I don't know if this is considered trivial enough to not require explicit
> copyright assignment. If it isn't, then I'll be happy to go through that
> process.
>  find/defs.h    |  3 +++
>  find/find.1    |  9 +++++++++
>  find/ftsfind.c |  8 ++++++--
>  find/parser.c  | 12 ++++++++++++
>  find/util.c    |  1 +
>  5 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Code-wise, it might be trivial, but by the time you add documentation, a
NEWS entry, and testsuite coverage of the new feature, it will be
non-trivial, so yes, you should pursue the copyright assignment process.

Will do.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]