> On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 2:34 PM, Rodney W. Grimes > <free...@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > > [ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ] > >> On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 12:43 PM, Rodney W. Grimes > >> <free...@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > >> > > >> > From the Linux man page at: > >> > http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/ls.1.html > >> > > >> > Using color to distinguish file types is disabled both by default > >> > and > >> > with --color=never. With --color=auto, ls emits color codes only > >> > when standard output is connected to a terminal. The LS_COLORS > >> > environment variable can change the settings. Use the dircolors > >> > command to set it. > >> > > >> > Um, so by default we should not be doing any colour... and we are... > >> > > >> > >> I don't recall making any argument that we're trying to match GNU > >> ls(1) behavior. Furthermore, again, we aren't doing any color by > >> default- only when the COLORTERM environment variable is set. > > > > So we are intentially being different? > > > > No, we are not intentionally being different. See: the next paragraph, > where I described that we've now-historically been honoring an > environment variable for this and have simply added a more standard > name for this variable.
And one that is set by default many more places than the one that had been set before, changing behavior people have been seeing for a long time, and some of those people did not expect that, nor seem to want it either. > > >> > >> ls(1) on FreeBSD historically honors -an- environment variable for > >> enabling color. > > > > Short history, long history it had no color support at all. > > Color support in ls(1) is now old enough to drink having been > introduced in 2000- I think that's long enough to call it > "historically" here in 2018. ok, but for 25 years that ls has output in b&w even in a colour terminal unless I took action to make it color output. > >> This environment variable is CLICOLOR. This commit > >> switched the environment variable honored to the more-standard > >> COLORTERM that is honored in other software and set by terminals that > >> are generally expected to be used with color. > >> > >> I'm writing an UPDATING entry for this now to notify these users that > >> they should remove COLORTERM from their environment if they do not, in > >> fact, want a colored terminal. > > > > Is that the only way to turn this off? > > That may not be desired either. > > Atleast GNU ls allows me to force it off on command invocation > > with --color=never, do we have an equivelent? > > > > Sure- it gets turned off the same way it got turned on. =) Well, it now gets turned on when it was not turned on before, and as is I now have to completly decolor to decolor ls(1), I have no easy knob to turn off colorls only. > I'm > certainly not averse to adding a --color long option, and will do so > when I find the time (later today, most likely). That would help, atleast the annoyed can alias ls ls --color=never. NB: from the GNU ls documentation there is a significant performance impact with having colorls turned on as you now have to stat every file in a directory listing. Is this also true of the BSD colorls? > Thanks, > Kyle Evans -- Rod Grimes rgri...@freebsd.org _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
