ls has stopped using the ISO date format
in [Debian]
|
Prev: Update GRUB to GRUB2 / Lenny to Squeeze
Next: Blockage on Internet maps - is a firewall intervening? Was: Re: PART DIAGNOSED: Re: Trying to install Google Earth on Lenny. How on earth??????
From: Brian Marshall on 30 May 2010 19:30 On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 01:51:14AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > -rwx------ 1 amp amp 891837 2010-05-03 22:55 03052010065.jpg > -rwx------ 1 amp amp 733361 2010-05-03 22:55 03052010066.jpg > > Can you tell if these files were created 5th march or 3rd may? How (I'd > really like to know)? I've never heard of a yyyy-dd-mm format. All the other formats usually put the year at the end, and if they don't, they're probably using slashes or something else instead of hyphens. That's sufficient to distinguish the ISO format from the rest, I think. Brian
From: Andrei Popescu on 30 May 2010 19:50 On Sun,30.May.10, 12:04:47, Brian Marshall wrote: > On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 10:44:38AM +0100, Nuno Magalhães wrote: > > In any case if locales were the reasoning, pt_PT.UTF-8 oughta be "30 > > Mai 2010" or something when it's actually just a translation from > > english, "Mai 30 2010". > > That looks like a bug in the pt_PT.UTF-8 locale. de_DE.UTF-8 gets it > right with "30. Mai 2010", so ideally, the locales *should* be fully > localized and not just translated. At least for Romanian it's not a bug in the locale, but rather missing feature, because only %c and %x are defined. Neither are suitable for ls (%c includes the weekday and %x doesn't include the time) so it is using it's own format. I'll report a bug for Romanian. Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
From: Andrei Popescu on 30 May 2010 20:00 On Sun,30.May.10, 16:21:26, Brian Marshall wrote: > On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 01:51:14AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > > -rwx------ 1 amp amp 891837 2010-05-03 22:55 03052010065.jpg > > -rwx------ 1 amp amp 733361 2010-05-03 22:55 03052010066.jpg > > > > Can you tell if these files were created 5th march or 3rd may? How (I'd > > really like to know)? > > I've never heard of a yyyy-dd-mm format. All the other formats usually > put the year at the end, and if they don't, they're probably using > slashes or something else instead of hyphens. That's sufficient to > distinguish the ISO format from the rest, I think. Sure, but I can't tell for sure unless I read strftime(3) or so... For me dd mmm yyyy is very clear, but I don't like the suppressing of the current year either :( Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
From: Brian Marshall on 30 May 2010 21:10 On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 02:52:52AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > On Sun,30.May.10, 16:21:26, Brian Marshall wrote: > > On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 01:51:14AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > > > -rwx------ 1 amp amp 891837 2010-05-03 22:55 03052010065.jpg > > > -rwx------ 1 amp amp 733361 2010-05-03 22:55 03052010066.jpg > > > > > > Can you tell if these files were created 5th march or 3rd may? How (I'd > > > really like to know)? > > > > I've never heard of a yyyy-dd-mm format. All the other formats usually > > put the year at the end, and if they don't, they're probably using > > slashes or something else instead of hyphens. That's sufficient to > > distinguish the ISO format from the rest, I think. > > Sure, but I can't tell for sure unless I read strftime(3) or so... > For me dd mmm yyyy is very clear, but I don't like the suppressing of > the current year either :( I see what you mean. Any date format that only uses numbers risks confusing the user about which number is the month and which is the day. The point of using an international standard for dates is to avoid that confusion, but "May 30 2010" is clear as long as you understand "May", so I guess it's a moot point in this case. Brian
From: Ron Johnson on 30 May 2010 22:30
On 05/30/2010 05:51 PM, Andrei Popescu wrote: [snip] > > You example shows only dates where it is quite obvious what date format > is used. Let me see... > > -rwx------ 1 amp amp 891837 2010-05-03 22:55 03052010065.jpg > -rwx------ 1 amp amp 733361 2010-05-03 22:55 03052010066.jpg > > Can you tell if these files were created 5th march or 3rd may? How (I'd > really like to know)? > That's the point... Which is why YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm is the only rational format. -- Dissent is patriotic, remember? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4C031E9F.8010108(a)cox.net |