Date: 23 Sep 2003 10:21:00 +0300 From: "Karlsson Mikael HKI/SOSV" <mikael.karlsson@hel.fi> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re:Re: Cat a directory Message-ID: <JA8AAAAAAgQSHwABYQADV7qgzdhU@master.hel.fi> In-Reply-To: <20030922160116.GB34858@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <20030922085416.605aca6b.cpressey@catseye.mine.nu> <20030922160116.GB34858@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthew Seaman wrote (22.9.2003 19:01): > >Have you tried typing 'ls -G' using the system ls(1) recently=3F > Yes, I have and I even have it aliased in my .bashrc file like this "alias ls=3D'ls -F -G'" so that ls will always use colors and type endings.=20But= my point was that native BSD system ls only colors these types, outclip from man pag= es: 1. directory 2. symbolic link 3. socket 4. pipe 5. executable 6. block special 7. character special 8. executable with setuid bit set 9. =20 executable with setgid bit set 10. directory writable to others, with sticky bit 11. directory writable to others, without=20sticky bit which are all supported in for example GNU/Linux ls, except 10 and 11, but= then they have an extra option to put=20different coloring on files with a speci= al ending. So that archives, moviefiles, soundfiles etc. have a special color while in BSD they're all grey/white. I know that this might seem like irritating for some and unnecessary for ot= hers but shouldn't people be given the possibility to choose for themselves and= not by the big people if they want to use colors on special file endings. And= I'm in no way saying that it has to come on at the same time as the normal colo= ring. But wouldn't it be time for people to try to expand their minds on how to= make BSD a little more friendly to others then unixpros and "hackers". > a good=20start. And while we're on the subject of different file types why >> doesn't ls support coloring of different file types like in Linux. As it would >> make finding certain files easier by coloring them differently depending= on >> their ending. >> > >Doesn't it=3F How many file types do you want to make different colors= =3F >Anyway, that seems to depend on shell. I can get color differences. > Well it might be dependent on the shell as I'm not sure about it, but as I already wrote above I think it should be up to the user to decide how many different filetype colors should be used and not to some BSD developer to= say "NO, won't happen!" cause he doesn't like the idea. He should say "Hey, that might be a good idea, why not try to see if it's possible to do." or "Sure,= why not, the public should get what they want.". This is exactly why open-source was started so that the people would have the power to decide what they want and not some money obsessed Gates. But it seems that development on FreeBSD= has taken a turn towards dictator reign or maybe always been that way. >> >> Other *NIX systems seem to have done this to their cat program so why >> >> can't FreeBSD=3F >> > >> >See above. > >FreeBSD has a better view of the world than some of=20the kiddie OSes. > Yes, you're absolutly right that FreeBSD has a better view of the world then other OSes. But what says that there couldn't be a flag that either allowes= or doesn't allow cat to read directories and maybe other files. As somebody sa= id cat only has a few flags so far. This way cat would be able to fill both experts and newbies wishes and needs. Then FreeBSD would really have a bett= er view on the world than GNU/Linux as it can't cat directories at all but Fre= eBSD users would be able=20to decide if they want it to be possible or not by si= mply using a flag. >Just because another OS takes the wrong road doesn't mean that FreeBSD >should also get lost. > No, I agree but wouldn't it be better if a few small things like what this topic has been about could be solved rationaly. Just so that FreeBSD wouldn= 't get on the wrong road but still satisfy both experts=20and newbies. I think= my suggestion about a flag to cat would be a solution and that file-ending coloring in ls wouldn't lead FreeBSD straight in to the woods, as it would= be possible to turn on/off these features on demand. > >Modifying cat so it couldn't do this would not be an improvement. > Yes, it would if it was possible to turn it on with a flag. > >"cat /bin" on Solaris 9 does exactly the same thing as on FreeBSD; shows >the contents of the directory, just like you're asking it to. Just because >you can't fathom a use for this behavior doesn't mean it's wrong. If >you don't want to see it, don't ask "cat" to show it to you. > OK, as I said that I was only 90% sure that it wouldn't do that. But the th= ing is that I don't have a problem with using cat, but the people I help do. The thing is that most books on *NIX systems start out with simple commands lik= e=20ls and cat. Most of the people I help think it's the only way to read files an= d by mistake specify a directory insted of a file or just for fun test it out on= a directory. Then their problem becomes my problem as their terminal locks.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?JA8AAAAAAgQSHwABYQADV7qgzdhU>