ls output

Bob Dunlop at
Thu May 12 15:07:34 UTC 2011


On Thu, May 12 at 10:26, David Henderson wrote:
> Gang, I'm working with the 'ls' command and noticed some inconsistencies 

Well ls output is working correctly for me on 1.18.3.  Have you compared
it against full blown ls on another box ?

I think the problem is that -A does not mean what you expect.  It's a
modified version of -a which shows all hidden files except "." and "..".

It won't modify the behaviour of -R showing the directory name before
listing the contents.

The problem is expressing these concepts concisely in what is already a
very big help message.  Perhaps:
        -A      Don't list . and ..
should read:
        -A      Don't show . and ..

The difference between list and show is subtle but it consumes no bytes
and is a small step in the right direction.

        Bob Dunlop

More information about the busybox mailing list