[X-Unix] 10.5 cli -what's up with 'more'? [a}

[Stroller]

I've had the mailbounce from this (7kb, limit of 5kb) for a few days  
- sorry I haven't gotten round to resending it before.

On 1 Dec 2007, at 18:25, David Ledger wrote:

> At 22:37 +0000 30/11/07, Stroller wrote:
>> On 30 Nov 2007, at 06:32, David Ledger wrote:
>>>  That's the way some of the Linux distributions are going - at  
>>> least, the HP RedHat one is. It's the thing I most dislike about  
>>> Linux. Lots of people making trivial changes to make it the way  
>>> *they* think it should be. Under HP RedHat, 'ls' sorts the '.'  
>>> files amongst the others. Why?
>> Are you sure this isn't configured in the distro's  
>> default .bash_profile or .bashrc? (or /etc/profile?)
>
> Does the same when using /bin/ls, so it's not an inherited alias or  
> function. I work under ksh with my own aliases pointing back at / 
> bin/ls anyway.

I don't quite know how to respond to this, because I don't quite  
understand the symptoms. If you'd like to explain this `ls` sorting a  
bit better - or give an example of the output? - I'd love to get to  
the bottom of this & prove that it's a bug (whether the fault of  
yourself, your distro or GNU, it doesn't matter to me), rather than a  
feature.

Note:
      (1) If you use a non-POSIX locale (e.g., by setting `LC_ALL' to
   `en_US'), then `ls' may produce output that is sorted differently  
than
   you're accustomed to.  In that case, set the `LC_ALL' environment
   variable to `C'.
   [from `info ls`]

>
>> The GNU versions of the "standard utilities" are different from  
>> those in Posix, System V or the BSDs, but I personally think these  
>> changes are often (much needed) improvements upon the originals  
>> and are generally for the best. IMO Bash & the GNU utilis are what  
>> a modern Unix shouldbe aiming for - it's certainly my expectation  
>> in terms of ease-of-use.
>
> I've yet to find a change that I would class as a much needed  
> improvement other than 'tar's new unwillingness to archive from '/'.

Ok, I don't know about your tar problem (it appears to work fine here)

Looking just at `ls` [1] I can immediately imagine occasions when the  
'-A", "-b", "-m" and "-i" GNU options could be useful. I admit I  
can't think of "much needed" improvements off the top of my head, but  
I bet I could find some if I spent enough time looking. I just don't  
think a language should stay static just because "this is the way  
we've always done things".

> I've no problem with them making the changes they do, as long as  
> they require a flag, environment variable or '.' file to trigger  
> them. Just making arbitrary changes break what would be cross  
> platform scripts.

I believe that there few GNU additions that break cross-platform  
scripts - all GNU utilities that I'm aware of accept POSIX options  
and it's clearly the intention that they behave correctly when POSIX  
options are provided.

[CONTINUED...]


[1] http://www.itqb.unl.pt:1111/~jcarrico/biomat/helpdesk/rman/ls.php3