On 02/03/15 20:42, Beatrice Torracca wrote: > On Monday 02 March 2015, at 17:38 +0000, Pádraig Brady wrote: >>> I read the explanation of the options you mention. Even with a file as big >>> as >>> to generate only 97 files I get this >>> x00 >>> x01 >>> ... >>> x89 >>> x9000 >>> x9001 >>> .... >>> x9007 >>> >>> While it is true that with the option "-a 3" I get the expected results >>> (.... >>> x089, x090, ....) I still think it is not the normal behavior to jump from >>> x89 >>> to x9000. x90 (and x91...x97) would be a perfectly good name with the same >>> suffix lenght of all the other names (i.e. 2). >> >> The naming is chosen so that standard shell globbing, >> and other simple sorting mechanisms, will result in the desired order. >> Consider: >> >> $ touch x90 x100 && echo x* >> x100 x90 > > I undertand that. I am talking about numbers that are <100 . I get only 98 > files. > > why not name the last 8: x90 x91....x97? > > in your example if I do > > $ touch x89 x90 && echo x* > x89 x90 > > there is no reason why there should not be a x90 file. > > Again I am not talking about a x100 file but of a number of files that is > less than 100 but more than 90. > In particular I have 98 files and I get x00....x89, x9000...x9007. why not > x90 x91...x97? Those would be ordered correctly with any sorting mechanism.
Between 90 and 99 files is an edge case, and split uses the general method in this case where it's not aware of how much data is available. To give split more info you can use the -a or -n options. Pádraig. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
