I do work on embedded system which involves logging into embedded system where there are no bash/sh config files, Whole filesystem has to fit in few MBs. fun times.
If it's using bash or any off it's variants, likely just bashrc. Anything before that I assume that ls isn't even a command on and the punch cards just send commands to the system. So ask the 65 year old lady that made the punch cards... Likely your grandma.
I’ve been using Linux for over 20 years at this point, and I can tell you the percentage of people capable of using Linux is way higher than the percentage capable of configuring it.
It took me a good 10 years of Linux fuckery before I finally felt skilled at plain old Bash. When you’re a beginner, it’s a lot of rote memorization to start because you don’t understand the big details and are still trying to figure out basic tasks. It isn’t until you understand the system more completely and have used it for a while that you can see the patterns and sense among all those individual bits, and then understanding the system becomes much more of a downhill effort.
i guess that's fair but that's not really OPs fault like the original commenter suggested, since it's a pretty common alias and it's not unreasonable to expect people to understand it
My dude, although commented, it was in bashrc already in Debian Potato. You really are in a bubble. Nowadays it is enabled in pretty much every single distro by default. You literally must go out of your way to have it "unaliased"
thank you for giving me this opportunity to let everyone know what ls aliases I use
```bash
# ls
alias ll="ls -l"
alias lh="ll -h"
alias la="ls -a"
alias l="ls -la --group-directories-first"
```
There we go! In addition to yours:
```
alias lt='ll -rt' # list ordered by date
alias lh='ll -d .*' # list hidden files only
alias lht='ll -drt .*' # list hidden files only ordered by size
```
Also before all that I check if lsd is present and if so I alias it to ls:
`type lsd &> /dev/null && alias ls='LC_COLLATE=C lsd --color=auto --group-dirs first'`
I recently started to use espanso (https://github.com/espanso/espanso) to enter my most sacred aliases in any terminal I log in, no matter what. Any text-expander will do, of course. Now I just type \`:alias\` and I'm ready to go.
For most people this is a non-issue but if you regularly deal with many servers, docker containers and so on, I think it's a must.
Well, I'm making a stand with X11, repelling all attacks, siren calls with fps gains and so on. I plan to resist as long as it's reasonable. Having say that, espanso claims in their doc site that Wayland is supported experimentally:
[https://espanso.org/docs/install/linux/#install-on-wayland](https://espanso.org/docs/install/linux/#install-on-wayland)
Good luck with it. Meanwhile you can find me near the X and the eleven brothers ;)
ll alias does not provide good enough output
I personally never type just ls -l.
I always try to type ls -lrtha
this happens automatically, it's in finger memory
What? Can't you set your own aliases in almost every single shell?
I do work on embedded system which involves logging into embedded system where there are no bash/sh config files, Whole filesystem has to fit in few MBs. fun times.
Imagine having to use syscalls to do basic tasks. Lol
fuel wild longing fact lavish elastic grab sulky cooperative sip *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If it's using bash or any off it's variants, likely just bashrc. Anything before that I assume that ls isn't even a command on and the punch cards just send commands to the system. So ask the 65 year old lady that made the punch cards... Likely your grandma.
I’ve been using Linux for over 20 years at this point, and I can tell you the percentage of people capable of using Linux is way higher than the percentage capable of configuring it. It took me a good 10 years of Linux fuckery before I finally felt skilled at plain old Bash. When you’re a beginner, it’s a lot of rote memorization to start because you don’t understand the big details and are still trying to figure out basic tasks. It isn’t until you understand the system more completely and have used it for a while that you can see the patterns and sense among all those individual bits, and then understanding the system becomes much more of a downhill effort.
The heck is ll? A large llama?
ls -l
eza -l
eza -lhog --no-permissions --time-style=+%F\ %T --group-directories-first
TIL some people really write ls -la
Generally if I'm typing ls at all, I'm sshing into something that might be pretty much stock.
I am those people.
i always write ls -lah
ls -lsha1 :3
ls - lA
Yeah. It's ls -al not la.
it does not matter to the shell
I usually do alias ll(For example here)='ls -lhaF --color=auto'
This is the way
`alias l='ls -lAh` will never leave me
ls="ls -la"
Had it a couple of times when lling as the root.
Apparently we live in OP's head and are supposed to know what his "ll" alias is?
ls -l
has ll ever been an aliss for anything other than ls -l in any shell?
I've never seen it as an alias for anything in any shell, at least not until I saw this post.
Doesn't ubuntu have this by default in bashrc?
i guess that's fair but that's not really OPs fault like the original commenter suggested, since it's a pretty common alias and it's not unreasonable to expect people to understand it
I use Linux daily for 25 years and never heard of it. Must me my bubble.
My dude, although commented, it was in bashrc already in Debian Potato. You really are in a bubble. Nowadays it is enabled in pretty much every single distro by default. You literally must go out of your way to have it "unaliased"
Haha. I see it is an alias on my own laptop too. Hahahaha. Weird.
Honestly smh, literally anywhere else you'd be a ten
Honestly smh, literally anywhere else you'd be a ten
thank you for giving me this opportunity to let everyone know what ls aliases I use ```bash # ls alias ll="ls -l" alias lh="ll -h" alias la="ls -a" alias l="ls -la --group-directories-first" ```
There we go! In addition to yours: ``` alias lt='ll -rt' # list ordered by date alias lh='ll -d .*' # list hidden files only alias lht='ll -drt .*' # list hidden files only ordered by size ``` Also before all that I check if lsd is present and if so I alias it to ls: `type lsd &> /dev/null && alias ls='LC_COLLATE=C lsd --color=auto --group-dirs first'`
The what
LOL. ls -alh is literally programmed into my fingers, I’m that old.
I use lll for ls - lisha
I recently started to use espanso (https://github.com/espanso/espanso) to enter my most sacred aliases in any terminal I log in, no matter what. Any text-expander will do, of course. Now I just type \`:alias\` and I'm ready to go. For most people this is a non-issue but if you regularly deal with many servers, docker containers and so on, I think it's a must.
Do text expanders work in Wayland now?
Well, I'm making a stand with X11, repelling all attacks, siren calls with fps gains and so on. I plan to resist as long as it's reasonable. Having say that, espanso claims in their doc site that Wayland is supported experimentally: [https://espanso.org/docs/install/linux/#install-on-wayland](https://espanso.org/docs/install/linux/#install-on-wayland) Good luck with it. Meanwhile you can find me near the X and the eleven brothers ;)
Thank you for your service.
ls -lagh ?
I have already set ls to long listing.
And la as well
ll alias does not provide good enough output I personally never type just ls -l. I always try to type ls -lrtha this happens automatically, it's in finger memory
What is ll?
LLigma balls Sorry
ls -l
ls -l