Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:2521 comp.os.linux.misc:16297 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!news.uh.edu!uuneo.neosoft.com!Starbase.NeoSoft.COM!nobody From: peter@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: Linux vs *BSD (new twist) Date: 4 Jun 1994 05:50:09 -0500 Organization: NeoSoft Internet Services +1 713 684 5969 Lines: 14 Message-ID: <2spm91$1b2@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> References: <2sl6o3$pvs@aurora.engr.latech.edu> <2smc4m$daj@Mercury.mcs.com> <WAYNE.94Jun3224657@backbone.uucp> NNTP-Posting-Host: starbase.neosoft.com In article <WAYNE.94Jun3224657@backbone.uucp>, Wayne Schlitt <wayne@cse.unl.edu> wrote: >The 'ls --color' is just an 1980's update to the 70's 'ls -F'... >Personally, I don't like either, but I have no problems with having >both as an option... The difference is that "ls -F" doesn't mean "ls" has to suck in termlib. Sometimes extra features are a bad idea, when they lead to code bloat. So far Linux itself seems to have avoided this common GNU disease (at least when compared with commercial UNIX), but with this sort of attitude it's not going to last. -- Peter, who first used UNIX on an 11/70 that supported 65 users in 2MB RAM, and still supports Xenix systems that'll run 10 users in 1MB.