Article View: gnu.utils.bug
Article #1602ls still incompatible
From: Roland McGrath
Date: Sat, 13 May 1989 21:20
Date: Sat, 13 May 1989 21:20
6 lines
713 bytes
713 bytes
The -D flag added in GNU ls 1.5 doesn't do the right thing. The only change I wanted was that if `foo' is a symlink to directory `bar', and I say "ls foo", I want it to act as if I said "ls bar". Adding a flag for this is OK. The -D flag implies -L, which I don't want.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<8905132120.AA03568@tully.Berkeley.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!GINGER.BERKELEY.EDU!mcgrath%tully.Berkeley.EDUShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!GINGER.BERKELEY.EDU!mcgrath%tully.Berkeley.EDU From: mcgrath%tully.Berkeley.EDU@GINGER.BERKELEY.EDU (Roland McGrath) Newsgroups: gnu.utils.bug Subject: ls still incompatible Message-ID: <8905132120.AA03568@tully.Berkeley.EDU> Date: 13 May 89 21:20:42 GMT Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Distribution: gnu Organization: GNUs Not Usenet Lines: 6