Re: [dev] [sbase] [patch] Optimize 'ls' and add '-U'

From: Charlie Paul <>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 15:04:53 -0700

Supporting large directories is fine. Adding new tools which most
people will never have a need for is not, and adding flags to ls every
time we think of a new use case is how GNU ended up with their mess.
An optimized "ls -U" is supporting large directories. A tool to count
them is a special purpose requirement.

On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Calvin Morrison <> wrote:
> On 22 July 2013 17:41, Chris Down <> wrote:
>> On 22 July 2013 23:27, Calvin Morrison <> wrote:
>>> This set command is simple, but still takes a long time, because the shell
>>> spends a long time doing the globbing of the *
>> In any case that it matters, you are doing filesystem structuring wrong.
> 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?
Received on Tue Jul 23 2013 - 00:04:53 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jul 23 2013 - 00:12:16 CEST