Re: built-in bash functions

2000-09-24 Thread Mirek Kwasniak
On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 01:44:49PM -0400, Michael P. Soulier wrote: > Hey guys. When I do a type -p ls, nothing is output. which ls returns > /bin/ls, but does the failure of the type -p signify that it's a shell > built-in? If so, how does that work wrt installing a new version of ls? There >

Re: built-in bash functions

2000-09-23 Thread brian moore
On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 03:31:22PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote: > On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 02:51:27PM -0400, Michael P. Soulier wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 01:56:01PM -0400, Joey Tsai wrote: > > > > > Yes, there are some utilities built into bash, but ls is not one of them. > > > ls > > > be

Re: built-in bash functions

2000-09-23 Thread Ethan Benson
On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 02:51:27PM -0400, Michael P. Soulier wrote: > On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 01:56:01PM -0400, Joey Tsai wrote: > > > Yes, there are some utilities built into bash, but ls is not one of them. > > ls > > belongs to package "fileutils". > > > > But since you mention it, > > > >

Re: built-in bash functions

2000-09-23 Thread Michael P. Soulier
pgpEfYRgX2c4p.pgp Description: PGP message

Re: built-in bash functions

2000-09-23 Thread Joey Tsai
:: Michael P. Soulier :: > Hey guys. When I do a type -p ls, nothing is output. which ls returns /bin/ls, > but does the failure of the type -p signify that it's a shell built-in? If so, > how does that work wrt installing a new version of ls? There are some tools > built into bash, are there not?

built-in bash functions

2000-09-23 Thread Michael P. Soulier
pgpXqLhGAL7Rp.pgp Description: PGP message