undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbaz002y ago0 comments

I can't say I've found anything particularly wrong with it in the last 40 years.

0 comments

The only problem I ever have with 'ls' is accidentally listing very large directories, but that is almost always an OS and filesystem issue at the core.

If an ls replacement could somehow handle directories with >10^4 files faster, then I'd switch.

o11c2y ago

Have you tried:

    alias ls='ls -U'

? I find my ^C usually makes it through if I need it. Sometimes minimizing the terminal or switching desktops also helps.

(it probably helps that I use a filesystem - btrfs - that is fundamentally append-based so gives a meaningful order even with -U)

queuebert2y ago

I have not -- thanks for the tip. Having to ^C out of an ls is sub-optimal, to say the least.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

queuebert2y ago

The only problem I ever have with 'ls' is accidentally listing very large directories, but that is almost always an OS and filesystem issue at the core.

If an ls replacement could somehow handle directories with >10^4 files faster, then I'd switch.

o11c2y ago

Have you tried:

    alias ls='ls -U'

? I find my ^C usually makes it through if I need it. Sometimes minimizing the terminal or switching desktops also helps.

(it probably helps that I use a filesystem - btrfs - that is fundamentally append-based so gives a meaningful order even with -U)

queuebert2y ago

I have not -- thanks for the tip. Having to ^C out of an ls is sub-optimal, to say the least.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse