Listings Question About Ping

[Ed Greshko]

On 12/23/2011 09:22 AM, Paul Allen Newell wrote:
> On 12/22/2011 5:15 PM, jdow wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> My F14 Linux box is getting repaired so I can't test ... what is
>>> this alias
>>> changing about 'ls'? I don't remember seeing any factory-setting
>>> .bashrc that
>>> has ls aliased to ls with some options?
>>
>>
>> It's been standard since RedHat 5.something, at least.
>>
>> It is in your .bashrc if you make a stock install and don't copy in a
>> fixed
>> .bashrc.
>>
>> {^_^}
>
> jdow:
>
> So factory setting .bashrc does have it aliased to something? What is it?

alias ls='ls --color=auto'
        /bin/ls
[egreshko at meimei profile.d]$ which ls
alias ls='ls --color=auto'
        /bin/ls
[egreshko at meimei profile.d]$ which ll
alias ll='ls -l --color=auto'
        /bin/ls
[egreshko at meimei profile.d]$ which l.
alias l.='ls -d .* --color=auto'
        /bin/ls


FWIW, the default settings are contained in /etc/profile.d/colorls.sh 


>
> I remember seeing certain files or directories colorized to some color
> over black which, in my opinion, is visually difficult to read and
> I've been following the thread with the hopes of seeign a solution. I
> don't mind, and actually like, colored text on a white background for
> dirs, links, excutables, whatever. Its just that one bad combination
> that I want to get rid of.
>
> And I can't tell how it becomes that color except I am thinking it
> might relate to directories created under cygwin?
>
> Wish I had my machine to test with rather than asking questions based
> on memory (and running the risk of having a senior moment in my memory)
>
> Thanks,
> Paul
>


-- 
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof was to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools. -- Douglas Adams in "Mostly Harmless