Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!spool.mu.edu!decwrl!adobe!heaven!heaven.woodside.ca.us
From: glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us (Glenn Reid)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Is ls -L broken in 2.0?
Message-ID: <505@heaven.woodside.ca.us>
Date: 15 May 91 07:04:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: heaven.505
References: <1991May13.013701.21135@investor.pgh.pa.us>
Sender: glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us
Lines: 11

Bob Peirce #305 writes
> Neither ls -L nor ls -lL are producing output to show symbolic links.
> Are they broken or is there another command I should be using?

ls -L *follows* symbolic links, it doesn't show them.  Just plain old
ls -l will show you the links.

--
 Glenn Reid				RightBrain Software
 glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us		NeXT/PostScript developers
 ..{adobe,next}!heaven!glenn		415-326-2974 (NeXTfax 326-2977)