Re: ls -i inefficiency

[Paul Eggert]

address@hidden (Eric Blake) writes:

> What does Solaris 10 do?

Good point.  My Solaris 10 host is down right now, but Solaris 9 does
not complain:

   54-pete $ ls -l foo
   lrwxrwxrwx   1 eggert   eggert         7 Feb 26 15:22 foo -> nowhere
   55-pete $ /bin/ls -L
   eggert.kshh  foo          savsmtptemp
   56-pete $ /usr/xpg4/bin/ls -L
   eggert.kshh  foo          savsmtptemp

OpenBSD 3.4 ls is similar.  So I guess your fix has _removed_ an
incompatibility rather than added one.  Good show!

> I just reread the POSIX wording

So did I.  It is a bit muddy.  I think we can do whatever we want
here, and I don't see a strong reason to do it one way or the other so
I prefer being compatible with the other guys.

I'd write up a NEWS item but I'm not sure when the GNU ls behavior
changed.