On 22 July 2013 18:18, Chris Down <ch...@chrisdown.name> wrote: > On 22 July 2013 23:44, Calvin Morrison <mutanttur...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Why? Why is it ridiculous to want to be able to support medium sized >> file directories, for example thousands of frames of a video, DNA >> sequencing files and others I often have are in large sets of files, >> and don't have any sub division that is logical other than numerically >> creating subdirectories. >> >> I think your thinking is wrong. In 2013, why can't we support a >> directory that responds reasonably fast with a large amount of >> directories? > > If you want to make the "it's 2013" argument, then you should also > bear in mind that on any modern hardware it already does respond > within the boundaries of being "reasonably fast". This is a niche > requirement. Please keep it out of any non-specialised utility groups. >
So following the whole "GNU is bloated with arguments and options idea someone mentioned": Okay so then should we remove the sort option from ls altogether? It isn't very suckless, and can be easily achieved with ls | sort
