Thu 22 Jan 2004 07:25:30 AM UTC, comment #4:
I went back and looked at the bug report in additional detail and think I found the problem:
[This is from the bug report jfs posted.]
> $ dpkg --status fileutils |grep ^Version
> Version: 4.1.10-2
> jfs@hades:/tmp/jfs$ /bin/ls -L -lg -ld /home/aalonso
drwxr-sr-x 6 aalonso 4096 2002-07-17 23:37 /home/aalonso
Notice here that the group is NOT replaced by a number, instead the file owner is plain missing. The above command has one less field then the command below.
> $ dpkg --status fileutils |grep ^Version
> Version: 4.1-10
> jfs@avalon:~$ /bin/ls -L -lg -ld /home/aalonso
drwxr-sr-x 6 aalonso aalonso 4096 jul 17 23:37 /home/aalonso
The problem is the same problem I have run into with RedHat, SuSE, etc. Newer versions of ls do not display the owner if the -g option is given.
Here is the what the man page says about -g for the ls command on newer versions of ls:
-g like -l, but do not list owner
I believe my origional patch is correct for the following reason:
Every place the $LSGROUP is used we are interested in parsing the file owner. So specifying the -g option is either ignored (older versions) or does not display the file owner.
removing the -g makes the ls command work correctly in all cases.
|