X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f From: "one2001boy AT yahoo DOT com" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040514 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: latest ls.exe version in XP problem References: <6jKbd.13476$nj DOT 4016 AT newssvr13 DOT news DOT prodigy DOT com> <416fec3d AT news DOT upm DOT es> In-Reply-To: <416fec3d@news.upm.es> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 38 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.104.245.224 X-Complaints-To: abuse AT prodigy DOT net X-Trace: newssvr21.news.prodigy.com 1097855908 ST000 69.104.245.224 (Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:58:28 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:58:28 EDT Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com X-UserInfo1: [[OSS_GGVJB_GZI]]RKB_UDAZZ\DPCPDLXUNNHXIJYWZUYICD^RAQBKZQTZTX\_I[^G_KGFNON[ZOE_AZNVO^\XGGNTCIRPIJH[@RQKBXLRZ AT CD^HKANYVW AT RLGEZEJN@\_WZJBNZYYKVIOR]T]MNMG_Z[YVWSCH_Q[GPC_A AT CARQVXDSDA^M]@DRVUM AT RBM Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:58:28 GMT To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Manuel Collado wrote: > one2001boy AT yahoo DOT com wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Just noticed several issues about ls.exe. Any help is appreciated. > > > ls.exe works OK in my XP machine. I'm using: > > bash-2.04$ ls --version > ls (fileutils) 4.1 > ... > Yes. I am using the same version. >> >> For the latest ls.exe under Windows XP, there are three issues. >> >> 1) under a directory with one thousand files, >> run command "ls -F" will take 1 minute to start to display the files >> and directory. using "ls" has no such long delay. using "dir" has no >> such a problem either. > > > ls -F takes 1~2 seconds to show the content of c:\windows\system32 with > 1881 objects in my machine > I have 2559 items, it wait for 10 seconds to start to display files in XP 3.0 Ghz, 512 M memory. I think the algorith for ls.exe might be optimized so that it can display some processed files and directory first, not wait till all files are processed. If the directory has more files, there will be more waiting time. dir can display the file and directory, "ls" cannot tell the difference between file and direcotry in the display. thus, "ls -F" is preferred. but it is too slow to use for directory with thousandss of files.