[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ls bug?
From: |
Matt Schalit |
Subject: |
Re: ls bug? |
Date: |
Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:50:37 -0700 |
Bob Proulx wrote:
>
> > I've just installed linux 2.4.4 and, much to my dismay, noticed the
> > behaviour of ls has changed. Indeed, it would seem the leading dot in
> > dotfiles is ignored when ls sorts its output. The result is a mess of
> > regular files interspersed with dotfiles. I hope you realize how much of
> > an impact this can have on scripts which rely on the standard behaviour
> > of ls.
>
> Thanks for the report. It matches a common pattern. This is not due
> to a bug, but to the fact that you have set environment variables that
> direct the program to use locale specific sorting tables. You or your
> vendor have probably set environment variables like LANG, LC_ALL, or
> LANG to en_US. There appears to be a problem with that table which is
> not part of the GNU program but part of your vendor's system release.
>
> Unset them, and then set LC_ALL to POSIX
>
> # If you use bash or some other Bourne-based shell,
> export LC_ALL=POSIX
>
> # If you use a C-shell,
> setenv LC_ALL POSIX
>
> and it will then work the way you expect.
>
> See the standards documentation for more information on LC_*
> variables.
>
> http://www.unix-systems.org/single_unix_specification_v2/xcu/ls.html
>
> Bob
A few thoughts for Fady,
Though I'm just a n00b, a lesser fix is to set
LC_COLLATE=POSIX or LC_COLLATE=C. It works for me.
I do that so I don't affect my LANG, which is set to
facilitate certain international characters.
Regards,
Matthew
- ls bug?, Fady Habra, 2001/06/26
- Re: ls bug?, Bob Proulx, 2001/06/28
- Re: ls bug?,
Matt Schalit <=