On Tue, July 17, 2007 08:10, Ian Malone wrote:
> On 17/07/07, Pete
Geenhuizen <pgeenhuizen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On
Tue, July 17, 2007 07:36, Karl Larsen wrote:
>
>> >
If it loads it is good I thought. I looked at man ls and it seems
>> > to be the same one from FC6 so far as I can see. What you
show is the
>> > same thing from FC6 and F7 the difference
being the date. On FC6 you
>> get
>> > a USA
standard date. On F7 you get the European date and that looks
>> > different. Both are accurate I think and I like the looks
of the F7
>> line
>> > better :-)
>>
I'm not disputing it's accuracy.
>> I checked the man pages.
>> I didn't ask for, didn't select, nor do I live in Europe, no
offense,
>> but I
>> have no interest in European
time display.
>>
>> None of you suggestions or
comments address my question, and if I
>> preferred
>> the f7 output I wouldn't have brought it up, I obviously prefer
the old
>> listing which has been that way in every Unix
version that I've worked
>> on
>> for the past 25
years.
>
> It's been suggested that you alias ls or look
at LC_TIME.
> I'd just like to point out 2007-07-17 is ISO, not
European
> format; in full the European format would be 17th July
2007.
Correct you are, sorry.
Yeah I could alias it
and format it, but why should I have to? The question is why the
change, and there has to be an easier way that mucking with an alias to
format the output.
>
<http://www.saqqara.demon.co.uk/datefmt.htm>
>
> We
should really just throw away all ambiguity and
> stick with
seconds since epoch. (Bad idea.)
Mebbe, but then we'd need
calculators and programs to give us the human time. Sigh
>
> --
> imalone
>
> --
> This
message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by
MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by
MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
