Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

You could alias it to ls.


sort by: page size:

Why wouldn't you just alias sl to ls? It'd be much less typing.

I have l aliased to ls -l.

I always alias "ls" to "l"

I've always just written that as \ls to call the non-alias

alias ls='ls -a'

ln -s, or alias it

I aliased `ls` to it… I don’t know how long ago. It’s been great.

maybe you can teach alias ls="ls -1"

Make an alias that adds ls --hide the same way you do for ls --color.

You could alias it ?

For some reason the typo I tend to make the most is ';s', so I've gone ahead and set `alias s=ls`

alias sl='sl;ls'

I've set alias ls=sl in dozens of systems belonging to colleagues over the years, just for the lulz! :D :D

Just alias it.

I like ll a lot for ls -ahlF, but I do run into its absence a lot on a remote machine. At that point, I'll just set the alias though.

alias ll='ls -halv'

I've got ls aliased to exa

I usually alias 'ls' to 'l' anyway, so it would not be a big deal to alias 'exa' to 'l'. I agree that exa is not exactly memorable.

It would probably be more useful, yes. But that would require remembering what my ls alias without `-h` is, and also would maybe give more confidence in the results of the quick 'n' dirty analysis than is justified.
next

Legal | privacy