3 ms·

Wow sort is misbehaving, but I cannot verbalize the problem. I ran your two ls invocations on the kernel source directory and diffed the output. --- /tmp/wit

by dfc 13y ago

Wow sort is misbehaving, but I cannot verbalize the problem. I ran your two ls invocations on the kernel source directory and diffed the output. --- /tmp/withutf 2013-07-09 21:03:23.060064079 -0400 +++ /tmp/withC 2013-07-09 21:03:30.069578205 -0400 @@ -1,26 +1,26 @@ total 544K -rw-r--r-- 1 dfc dfc 252 Jul 9 19:27 Kconfig -rw-r--r-- 1 dfc dfc 2.5K Jul 9 19:27 Kbuild -drwxr-xr-x 113 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 drivers +drwxr-xr-x 2 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 init +drwxr-xr-x 2 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 ipc +drwxr-xr-x 2 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 mm +drwxr-xr-x 2 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 usr +drwxr-xr-x 3 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 block +drwxr-xr-x 3 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 virt +drwxr-xr-x 4 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 crypto +drwxr-xr-x 9 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 lib +drwxr-xr-x 9 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 security drwxr-xr-x 11 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 kernel drwxr-xr-x 12 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 samples drwxr-xr-x 13 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 scripts drwxr-xr-x 17 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 tools drwxr-xr-x 22 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 sound drwxr-xr-x 26 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 include -drwxr-xr-x 2 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 init -drwxr-xr-x 2 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 ipc -drwxr-xr-x 2 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 mm -drwxr-xr-x 2 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 usr drwxr-xr-x 32 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 arch drwxr-xr-x 36 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 firmware -drwxr-xr-x 3 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 block -drwxr-xr-x 3 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 virt -drwxr-xr-x 4 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 crypto drwxr-xr-x 55 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 net drwxr-xr-x 73 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 fs -drwxr-xr-x 9 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 lib -drwxr-xr-x 9 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 security +drwxr-xr-x 113 dfc dfc 4.0K Jul 9 19:27 drivers -rw-r--r-- 1 dfc dfc 7.4K Jul 9 19:27 REPORTING-BUGS drwxr-xr-x 101 dfc dfc 12K Jul 9 19:27 Documentation -rw-r--r-- 1 dfc dfc 19K Jul 9 19:27 COPYING There were differences in the output but I am not sure if that is a bug or if it has to do with locale rules for sorting. What do you think is broken with sort? There seems to be a bug regarding utf and sort in debian[1] but I am not sure if it is the same problem. Do you know if there is a bug in redhat's bugzilla for the issue? Up until this thread I did not realize sort behaved differently depending on the locale.[2] Are you sure its not a difference in locale expectations on how strings are sorted? [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=695489 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=695489 [2] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5909404/sort-not-sorting-as-expected-space-and-locale http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5909404/sort-not-sorting-...

0x0 13y ago
One is sorting "intelligently" numerically, the other is just comparing ascii values, on the first numerical field.
- dfc 13y ago
  Thank you for indulging our rather off topic curiosity. Just so I am clear are you saying the reason for the difference in sorting has to do with locale interpretations and is not a bug in sort?
derekp7 13y ago
The -h option is supposed to sort numerically when the numbers are in "human readable" format (i.e., 42k instead of 42137), as in the matching -h option for ls (and other commands). And the "+4 -5 -h" will sort on the 5'th column. It works great if you aren't using -h (sort +4 -5 -n, with a regular "ls -l" command). Also, works if the number is in the first column (as in: du -h |sort -h).

by dfc 13y ago

0x0 13y ago

One is sorting "intelligently" numerically, the other is just comparing ascii values, on the first numerical field.

dfc 13y ago
Thank you for indulging our rather off topic curiosity. Just so I am clear are you saying the reason for the difference in sorting has to do with locale interpretations and is not a bug in sort?

derekp7 13y ago

The -h option is supposed to sort numerically when the numbers are in "human readable" format (i.e., 42k instead of 42137), as in the matching -h option for ls (and other commands). And the "+4 -5 -h" will sort on the 5'th column. It works great if you aren't using -h (sort +4 -5 -n, with a regular "ls -l" command). Also, works if the number is in the first column (as in: du -h |sort -h).