|Anonymous | Login||2023-10-03 21:02 UTC|
|Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Docs|
|Viewing Issue Simple Details|
|ID||Category||Severity||Type||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0001023||[1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1] Shell and Utilities||Editorial||Clarification Requested||2016-01-11 18:55||2020-04-14 15:03|
|Priority||normal||Resolution||Accepted As Marked|
|Final Accepted Text||See Note: 0003494.|
|Summary||0001023: Behaviour of ls -R without -a under presence of directories beginning with a dot|
IEEE 1003.1, 2013 Edition specifies the that "Filenames beginning with a <period> (’.’) and any associated information shall not be written out unless explicitly referenced, the −A or −a option is supplied, or an implementation-defined condition causes them to be written." Furthermore the -R option is specified as "Recursively list subdirectories encountered. When a symbolic link to a directory is encountered, the directory shall not be recursively listed unless the −L option is specified. The use of −R with −d or −f produces unspecified results."
Different POSIX certified systems seem to understand the meaning of "encountered" with respect to directory names differently. The first interpretation I found is that directories omitted from printing because their name begins with a dot are also omitted from recursive listing unless -a or -A is supplied. This behaviour can be found on Solaris and HP-UX. The second interpretation is that all subdirectories are always listed, including those with names beginning with a dot, regardless of whether they are listed or not. This behaviour can be found on AIX.
Clarify the behaviour of ls -R with respect to directories whose name begins with a dot.
Preferably, to the paragraph beginning in line 95191:
-R Recursively list subdirectories encountered. When a symbolic
link to a directory is encountered, the directory shall not be
recursively listed unless the −L option is specified. The use of
−R with −d or −f produces unspecified results.
add the sentence
When -R is used without -a or -A, it is unspecified whether
subdirectories with filenames beginning with a <period> ('.')
are recursively listed.
Don Cragun (manager)
The standard does not speak to this issue, and as such no conformance distinction can be made between alternative implementations based on this.
This is being referred to the sponsor.
It seems that all implementations of ls, but one, have excluded hidden directories when using ls -R without -A and without -a. The standard developers believe that this is the correct or intended behavior. However, the standard did not clearly specify this behavior.
Notes to the Editor (not part of this interpretation):
Recursively list subdirectories encountered.
Recursively list subdirectories encountered. Subdirectories with filenames beginning with a <period> ('.') shall be recursively listed if and only if the subdirectory name was included in the filenames listed for the containing directory.
|Interpretation proposed: 15 Dec 2016|
|Interpretation Approved: 18 Jan 2017|
|2016-01-11 18:55||Clausecker||New Issue|
|2016-01-11 18:55||Clausecker||Name||=> Robert Clausecker|
|2016-01-11 18:55||Clausecker||Section||=> ls|
|2016-01-11 18:55||Clausecker||Page Number||=> 2888–2897|
|2016-01-11 18:55||Clausecker||Line Number||=> 95140–95557|
|2016-11-17 16:55||Don Cragun||Note Added: 0003494|
|2016-11-17 16:56||Don Cragun||Interp Status||=> Pending|
|2016-11-17 16:56||Don Cragun||Final Accepted Text||=> See Note: 0003494.|
|2016-11-17 16:56||Don Cragun||Status||New => Interpretation Required|
|2016-11-17 16:56||Don Cragun||Resolution||Open => Accepted As Marked|
|2016-11-17 16:56||Don Cragun||Tag Attached: issue8|
|2016-12-15 18:08||ajosey||Interp Status||Pending => Proposed|
|2016-12-15 18:08||ajosey||Note Added: 0003516|
|2017-01-18 15:22||ajosey||Interp Status||Proposed => Approved|
|2017-01-18 15:22||ajosey||Note Added: 0003546|
|2020-04-14 15:03||geoffclare||Status||Interpretation Required => Applied|
|Mantis 1.1.6[^] Copyright © 2000 - 2008 Mantis Group|