On Sun, 2005-04-10 at 14:47 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote: > On Sunday 10 April 2005 01:06 pm, Ron Johnson wrote: > > On Sun, 2005-04-10 at 05:59 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > > > Ron Johnson wrote: [snip] > If you change the "for f in $(ls -l)" to "for f in $(ls -l$)", it won't work. > I don't feel I'm an expert, but from my layman's understanding of *nix, that > each command does one thing and does it well, it seems there should be two > switches on ls to allow it to print the FULL pathname, or the relative > pathname of a file in either a regular or recursive listing. Amen, brother! > If I knew C, > and had the time, I'd add one myself, but from what I understand, ls is part > of the bash shell (which ls gives no response), and I don't want to get into > that. No. ls is part of the coreutils package. An example of an internal bash command is "printf". Type "help" at a $ prompt to list all available internal bash commands. > I also wouldn't know how to submit such a patch for potential inclusion, but > it seems to me that is a weakness in the command. http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/coreutils -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. "The first stage of fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power" Mussolini
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part