From owner-freebsd-questions  Thu Sep 21 14: 9:19 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA94837B43E
	for <questions@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:09:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from bright@localhost)
	by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id e8LL9DF23188;
	Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:09:13 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:09:13 -0700
From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To: Drew Sanford <drew@planetwe.com>
Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: ls versions and the -G switch
Message-ID: <20000921140913.A9141@fw.wintelcom.net>
References: <39CA76BE.60859E20@planetwe.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i
In-Reply-To: <39CA76BE.60859E20@planetwe.com>; from drew@planetwe.com on Thu, Sep 21, 2000 at 03:59:42PM -0500
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

* Drew Sanford <drew@planetwe.com> [000921 13:59] wrote:
> I have two FreeBSD boxes - one that will accept the -G switch for ls,
> and one that won't. I'm curious about the differences in the versions of
> ls regarding this. Here's the uname outputs:
> 
> accepts ls -G:
> FreeBSD *.*.* 4.0-STABLE FreeBSD 4.0-STABLE #1: Thu May 11 20:41:07 CDT
> 2000    root@*.*.*:/usr/src/sys/compile/*  i386
> 
> doesn't accept ls -G:
> FreeBSD *.*.* 4.0-STABLE FreeBSD 4.0-STABLE #0: Mon Jun 12 18:45:29 CDT
> 2000     root@*.*.*:/usr/src/sys/compile/*  i386
> 
> Both of the man pages look the same except for the mention of G as a
> choice for a switch.

Sometime between May 11 20:41:07 CDT 2000 and Mon Jun 12 18:45:29
CDT 2000 someone merged in the -G option for ls.

These things happen. :)

-Alfred


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message