Kolyan wrote: > This problem stays more than two years (There is bugreport in 2001 in > bug-fileutils).
Could you be more specific please? I could not locate anything relevant. > How long will you disappoint users with functionality, > declared in /etc/DIR_COLORS? Excuse me? /etc/DIR_COLORS? GNU fileutils does not include any file /etc/DIR_COLORS. ls -l /etc/DIR_COLORS ls: /etc/DIR_COLORS: No such file or directory > User can't choose, which terminals are color, which are not. > Even in dumb terminal, which doesn't support color seqeuences user get > > [0mfile_nam[0fd [0mfile_nam[0fd [0mfile_nam[0fd [0mfile_nam[0fd > > with "ls --color". But this command is alias to ls in most systems. > Developers must do somthing with this situation. At least, use three lines > to determine, has terminal bold mode or not. GNU fileutils does not include any user aliases. User aliases are by definition a user defined configuration. If you don't want any aliases then don't define any. It is your choice. I believe you must be having a problem with some particular distribution of the GNU project software. It sounds as if a vendor is distributing the software and has "helped", and I use that term with sarcasm here, helped you out by including aliases for you on your system. If so then I recommend you file a bug report with your vendor. That is not an appropriate configuration. Until your vendor fixes the problem I recommend that you add unalias commands to undo the breakage to your $HOME/.profile environment file. This will work around the problem. unalias ls I personally am using the Debian GNU/Linux distribution of software and am not seeing any strange problems such as you are reporting. Bob -- Please follow up to the list and not to me privately unless it is personal. _______________________________________________ Bug-fileutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-fileutils
