Prev: anti-virus
Next: New distro's site
From: Loki Harfagr on 22 Feb 2010 04:54
Thu, 18 Feb 2010 18:01:38 +0000, Robert Newson did cat :

> Loki Harfagr wrote:
>> Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:35:09 +0000, SM did cat :
>>
>>> 2010-02-18, Steve Ackman skribis:
>>>> In <3sZen.66141$Db2.22198(a)edtnps83>, on Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:45:35
>>>> GMT, Dave Krebes, dkrebes(a)gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> And what is in the "proc" directory?
>>>> Different on every system. To see what's in yours...
>>>>
>>>> $ cd /proc
>>>> $ ls -l
>>>>
>>> Unnecessary use of cd ;)
>>
>> maybe not, imagine you're not looking what you think you're looking at,
>> e-g: $ cd /
>> $ mkdir -p PROc/{a,b,c,d}
>> $ ln -s PROc PROC
>> $ ls -l PROC
>> $ cd PROC && $ ls -l
> Mefinx the suggestion was:
>
> $ ls -l /proc

yes and that's exactly what would fail in case /proc was a link :-)

>
> no need to cd at all ;)

well, read again and use the test and compare lines above ,-)
it's clear that you need either to use the 'cd' *or* to
use 'ls -l /proc/' when you're interested in the content of the
pointer.
Now, note that'd be only if someone made a prank of your /
and made proc a link, and of course the fuzzy nature of /proc
is another story ;-)
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: anti-virus
Next: New distro's site