Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 22:25:34 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 189057] [PATCH] Adding an option to ls(1) to display file permissions in octal Message-ID: <bug-189057-8-cOa5j3QBPu@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-189057-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-189057-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189057 Chris Hutchinson <portmaster@bsdforge.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |portmaster@bsdforge.com --- Comment #3 from Chris Hutchinson <portmaster@bsdforge.com> --- OK. Just found this pr(1). I'd like to weigh in on this... I was the one who started this mess, by making a request in the FreeBSD forums. As memory serves, I asked if there was any incantation of ls(1) that would return the OCTAL properties of a file, and directory. The answer was no. But, "Fonz" quickly hacked up a quick diff(1)/patch(1) that accomplished exactly what I had asked about -- Thanks again, Fonz! That's nice. But what's your point? Point is; in any event this is a nice option. This can be considered especially helpful for *NIX new-commers, as it can be difficult at first to figure out the permissions scheme -- especially those coming from Microsoft products. This "feature"/ option adds precious little *extra* code, and does NOT violate POSIX. It is more intuitive (for most) to first look to ls(1) for this type of information, than to look otherwise. Perhaps better; is there any strongly compelling reason that this option should *not* be added to ls(1)? Thank you for your indulgence, and thank you again, Fonz. --Chris -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-189057-8-cOa5j3QBPu>