Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 21:13:46 -0500 (EST) From: Brian Clapper <bmc@NETAXS.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: linux `ls' port Message-ID: <199601090213.VAA09284@unix3.netaxs.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960108193741.4480I-100000@cappuccino.eng.umd.edu> from "Chuck Robey" at Jan 8, 96 07:38:19 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chuck Robey wrote: > Hmm, how does the linux ls differ from colorls in ports/misc ? >From my reading of the man page for colorls-2.1 (which is in ports/utils on my CD), and from my limited use of it, its colorization is controlled by the LSCOLORS environment variable. The file type is the only discriminant used to determine color, and (again, acc. to the man page) only the following types are supported: 1. directory 2. symbolic link 3. socket 4. pipe 5. executable 6. block special 7. character special 8. executable with setuid bit set 9. executable with setgid bit set 10. directory writable to others, with sticky bit 11. directory writable to others, without sticky bit That's a direct quote from the man page. The Linux version (which is, again, just a patched GNU `ls') is more versatile. Among other things it: - permits colorization based on file extension; - permits you to limit colorization to tty devices only; - and permits separate colorization of "orphan" symbolic links. Mainly, I prefer its versatility, which is why I ported it to FreeBSD. ---------- Brian Clapper bmc@willscreek.com -OR- bmc@telebase.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199601090213.VAA09284>