[Ti] iPod copy on Big Al

[Paul Russell]

>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

It's not really something you want to rely on. e.g. with 10.2.6 and 
the latest developer tools I get the following:

prussell% which ll
ll:      aliased to ls -lag !* | more

YMMV and all that.

Paul

--