Ed Maste <emaste@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> Note that the helper function's name no longer reflects what it does
>> with such a change, so it needs to be renamed. Together with style
>> fix, perhaps
>>
>> ls_no_dot () {
>> (cd "$1" && printf "%s\n *)
>> }
>>
>> is what we want,
>
> I believe the tests should pass or be skipped when run as root, so I
> think we should either require (something like) SANITY for these
> tests, or make the change above. I'm happy with either option; I'll
> send a v2 based on the approach above for consideration.
OK, after thinking about it a bit more, I think "Your ls is broken"
was completely missing the point. What we want in the callers of
this helper is to list the contents of a directory, and "ls" is one
possible (and easiest, if there were no "oops, sometimes -A is enabled
implementation by default" complication) implementation.
And "ls_no_dot" is a misnomer from that point of view. We are not
even using "ls", so perhaps we should just call it "list_files" or
something?
Thanks.
