Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!netsys!lll-winken!cheers!exodus
From: exodus@cheers.UUCP (Greg Onufer)
Newsgroups: gnu.utils.bug
Subject: Re: GNU ls bug
Summary: Doesn't look like this is a bug
Message-ID: <226@cheers.UUCP>
Date: 30 Mar 89 19:52:22 GMT
References: <8903300354.AA14076@paris.Berkeley.EDU>
Distribution: gnu
Organization: Cheers Bar & Grill
Lines: 17

In article <8903300354.AA14076@paris.Berkeley.EDU>, mcgrath%paris.Berkeley.EDU@GINGER.BERKELEY.EDU (Roland McGrath) writes:
> If foo is a symlink to a directory, `ls foo' should
> behave as if it were an actual directory; i.e., it should
> list the contents of the directory, rather than `foo@' (under -F).

The behaviour as you describe it is correct in the sense that all
versions of 'ls' I have used to date behave the same way (most notably
SunOS and other (?) BSD derivatives.  This does not mean that the
behaviour is not annoying....

The rationale may be that symbolic links are sort of like files themselves,
even if the name they contain points to a directory.


-- 
Greg Onufer .. University of the Pacific .. Focus Semiconductor
.. greg@cheers.uucp .. cheers!greg@lll-winken.llnl.gov .. 209-957-3963