[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ls has stopped using the ISO date format

Ron Johnson wrote:
On 06/03/2010 10:28 AM, Daniel Barclay wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 06/01/2010 10:06 AM, Daniel Barclay wrote:
Andrei Popescu wrote:

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)?

The third of May, because it's recognizable as the ISO date/time
format ....


There's no way on Earth to *know* whether this date is May 3rd or
March 5th.

So? (What's your point? We were talking about the ISO date format,
the ISO date format when time fields are present, and, earlier,
common local data formats. Your example clearly isn't one of the
first two. Are you claiming that some local data format uses that
component order _and_ uses hyphens?)

I interpreted Andrei's email as referring to the ambiguities in the file *names* (like 03052010065.jpg), not the fs timestamps.

Okay, gotcha now.  Yes, I was addressing the ls timestamp output.



Reply to: