On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, Richard Jones wrote:
> > William Chow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On 17 Feb 1997, Michael Harnois wrote: > > > > > > > > > > .bashrc and/or .profile (or .cshrc or .zshrc, whatever): > > > > eval `dircolors` > > > > alias ls 'ls --color=auto' > > > > > > This would be wonderful if it were the correct answer. However, as we > > > > This IS the correct answer, WTF are you talking about? I've been using a > > similar alias in my startup scripts for months now. > > > > How often do you use X? Your solution will work on the console, it will > even print bold characters for special files with Xterms, but it wont > do colour on my system. The Xresource mentioned below needs to be set. > Yeah, but nowhere did you mention this in your reply. You should've said "this doesn't appear to work in my xterm... etc." not "ls color doesn't work." > > As far as I know Michael is correct on this one, man ls will tell you how > to get ls to output the required terminal codes to send color, but you need > to setup xterm to be able to displace them. BTW is "maybe your brain froze > over" really necessary? I know Michael was a little flamey on his reply, but > this seems a reaction to your orignal unwarranted, "Read the man page you > bloody fool", response. I didn't appreciate the attitude expressed in "this would be wonderful if it worked, etc. etc." when the person replied with the correct answer to the question. You should've asked the right question, which is "ls color appears to work when I am in regular console mode, but not in my xterm," or even better "when in my color-xterm." The reply to the former would mostly be "are you sure you're using a color xterm" the reply to the second would be "are you sure your resources are set correctly?" Ask the right question, get the right answer, otherwise you start confusing people. Will -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
