On 3/31/25 12:26, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
ls(1) always potentially shows a past state anyway.
Sure, but traditionally (and I'm talking about 7th edition Unix) a single output line of 'ls' corresponded to a state obtained atomically from the file system. I realize we can't always do that nowadays but the further we depart from it, the worse 'ls' users will be.
