Sender: rich AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <390D7C83.C19CD316@bigfoot.com>
Date: Mon, 01 May 2000 13:45:55 +0100
From: Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.14 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Some questions about porting fileutils 4.0
References: <39081435 DOT E2EDBC04 AT bigfoot DOT com> <39089981 DOT 16E7FAF7 AT bigfoot DOT com> <200004282213 DOT SAA26938 AT indy DOT delorie DOT com> <390A12B4 DOT 437341D9 AT bigfoot DOT com> <200004292210 DOT SAA28184 AT indy DOT delorie DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> First, redirection is not necessarily relevant to `dircolors', because
> it runs under a different environment than `ls'.
[snip]
> The reason `dircolors' ignores TERM is that the method used for
> colorization doesn't depend on TERM.

Thanks for the explanation. I'll leave the patch for the ignoration of
TERM there.

> > I found that 'ls c:' does not work in bash (in 3.16 and 4.0 ports).
> > Even 'ls c\:' fails. Is this expected behaviour? 'ls c:' works OK
> > from command.com.
> 
> I cannot reproduce this problem on my machine; "ls c:" works for me
> both from COMMAND.COM and from Bash.  What version of Bash are you
> using?  Is `ls' an alias maybe?

I'm thoroughly confused now. I tested (on different "machines") with:

Windows '95 OSR 2.1 + bash 1.14.7
Windows NT 4 + bash 2.03

with:

alias ls='ls -F --color=tty'

and it worked. I'll retest '95 + 2.03 later.

Bye,

-- 
Richard Dawe
richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com ICQ 47595498 http://www.bigfoot.com/~richdawe/