Re: qshell, ls, sort by size

[Hans Boldt <hans@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Scott Klement wrote:
> Hans,
>
> So it's your position that the fact that ls doesn't work the same as 
> Linux should be regarded as a bug and reported to IBM as such?  Despite 
> that there's a really easy way to solve the problem that will work on i 
> and all Unix systems?
>
> That's your position?
>
> Or are you really just trying to create an argument?

Hey, you know I love a good argument!

Should the fact that qshell isn't quite compatible with Linux be
considered a bug by IBM? IBM would have to consider what benefit there
is to changing the ls command. That is, are there hordes of Linux
applications waiting to be  ported to qshell?

Alternatively, you suggest that there's an easy way to code shell
commands in a manner that's compatible amongst all Unix and i systems.
Shall you be the one to try to convince Linux programmers to limit
themselves to the Posix command switches in order to facilitate porting
to qshell? Do you want to be asked by your Unix programmer friends
"What's an iSeries?"

Cheers! Hans