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