Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: patches to give colorized file listings
- X-seq: zsh-workers 2046
- From: "Greg J. Badros" <gjb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Bruce Stephens <stephens@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: patches to give colorized file listings
- Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 10:07:34 -0400 (EDT)
- Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <199608220951.LAA18845@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Thu, 22 Aug 1996, Bruce Stephens wrote:
> I like it, but there are a couple of things I don't like.
>
> The technical one is that it seems to depend on the listtypes option,
> so I can either have colours and characters indicating the types, or
> characters indicating the types, or nothing. I'd like to be able to
> have just colours.
This is pretty doable, but since I use file types I attacked that side
first to see what other snags came up... few did, so I went forward. I
can easily add the code to both parts, or better, factor it out and make
it a little bit cleaner, too.
> The other one is an IPR problem: it uses the patch that gives the GNU
> fileutils package colourized ls (included in the latest fileutils), so
> what's the copyright position on this? Personally, I don't care, but I
> thought some people wanted to keep zsh from being infected with the
> GPL?
I looked through the color-ls patch, and have no idea what their copy
policy is. My distribution of the patch is a single gz file, so it's hard
to say. I've not been following the group long enough to know about a
history of GPL infection fright. :-) It's actually not that complicated
an ordeal, but I don't believe in reinventing the wheel, plus it'd be
confusing if zsh colorized listing worked differently that ls's. Anybody
know more about color-ls?
>
> --
> Bruce Stephens | email: B.Stephens@xxxxxxxxxxx
Greg J. Badros
gjb@xxxxxxxxxxx
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author