From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: usotsuki@buric.co (Steve Nickolas)
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 23:07:23 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [TUHS] TECO was: Re: basic tools / Universal Unix
In-Reply-To: <20171117035615.55nojmey5wz4fz63@matica.foolinux.mooo.com>
References: <CALMnNGg_FniaDj53+xFr3A3x=YCw3tjmg44sKB7zmEYE25rrCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <c9cfc24dbb6e94a07e390030ae75b54fd9da3682@webmail.yaccman.com>
 <CAKr6gn3Ub7ve0G0dSAviXAe5q6CDUN-mY7ghxhR2Ztyhsh7KCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171117035615.55nojmey5wz4fz63@matica.foolinux.mooo.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.02.1711162306040.67481@frieza.hoshinet.org>

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017, Ian Zimmerman wrote:

> On 2017-11-17 10:38, George Michaelson wrote:
>
>> Actually no, I still hate colour LS. I like ls -F because the implied
>> extra information can be semantically extracted with a grep, although
>> why find . -type d -maxdepth 1 isn't being used is beyond me.
>
> Colorized ls can show you other things.  For example:
>
> * setuid/setgid files
> * broken symlinks
>
> ls -F can't do these.
>
> Myself, I like ls itself to be colourless, but I do have an alias "cls"
> and use it often.
>
>

Overall I guess it's more of a matter of, well, do you want Unix or do you 
want GNU?  On a desktop, I tend to find the GNU extensions useful.  On a 
server, I think I want lean and mean, minimalist, and more of a pure Unix 
environment.

-uso.