Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!uw-june!uw-entropy!dataio!pilchuck!ssc!fyl
From: fyl@ssc.UUCP (Phil Hughes)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: lc
Message-ID: <1729@ssc.UUCP>
Date: 1 Mar 89 20:38:42 GMT
References: <2107@water.waterloo.edu> <300@laas.laas.fr> <8344@watcgl.waterloo.edu>
Organization: SSC, Inc., Seattle, WA
Lines: 26

In article <8344@watcgl.waterloo.edu>, ljdickey@watmum.waterloo.edu (Lee Dickey) writes:
> In article <300@laas.laas.fr> someone who shall remain nameless

> >It seems that your `lc' is non-standard with respect to System V;
> >that's where it came from.

> Perhaps someone who knows more about this will comment.

> I have used "lc" since the early 70's,
> When was System V introduced?

lc is a XENIX-ism.  It is, in system 5 jargon, equivalent to ls -C.
It forces ls to produce multi-column output with the entries sorted
down the column (as opposed to ls -x which sorts across).

Some system 5s come with lc just to humor the XENIX users - ENIX
is an example.  I don't have my 386 5.3.2 manual here but it may
have been added by ATT in that release just to humor people but
I can promise you it isn't standard in release 5.3.0 from ATT.

The solution of course is to get a complete set of our pocket references
on all flavors of UNIX so you can play mix and match games :-).

-- 
Phil Hughes, SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155  (206)FOR-UNIX
    uw-beaver!tikal!ssc!fyl or uunet!pilchuck!ssc!fyl or attmail!ssc!fyl