On Mon, 19 May 2003 8:42AM -0700, Jesse Brown wrote: > > I'm sorry Sam, thanks for the clarification. I've worked on numerous > Unix > systems and have never seen any documentation where "ls -l" ( list > contents > in long format) referred to as ll. > > In BSD (OS X) "ll" does not work from the command line, so I'm at a > loss as > to why it was used to illustrate this example. If I remember correctly, both "l" and "ll" worked the same as "ls -l" on 10.1, but not in 10.2 -- Sam Hotchkiss s at swh.cn This message was sent wirelessly from a T-Mobile SideKick