Re: ls -R bug?

On 2020-07-04, Ottavio Caruso <ottavio2006-usenet2012@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2020 at 19:59, Richard Ipsum <richardipsum@vx21.xyz> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Output of ls -R between OpenBSD and GNU coreutils seems to differ,
>> OpenBSD ls -R will apparently list "hidden" directories like .git,
>> whereas GNU coreutils will not, is this expected behaviour or a bug?

Try "/bin/ls" to avoid the effects of whatever you have "ls" aliased to.

> Funny, because this seems to validate what you are reporting:
>
> oc@OpenBSD:~$ ls -R
> oc-backup test
>
> ./.local/share:
> xorg
>
> ./.local/share/xorg:
> Xorg.0.log Xorg.0.log.old
>
> ./oc-backup:
> docs mbox
>
> ./oc-backup/docs:
> bgpd.conf man-todo patch.patch root-mail
> bug oc-mail robots.txt sudo.log
>
> ./test:
> dmesg fstab index.html uyiuyi
> file fstab.dos ls.ps
> file.bak fstab.tr openbsd-tips-wip
> file.orig fstab.unix test.wav
>
><note the ./.local/share and ./.local/share/xorg>

.local is a "hidden" directory (starts with .)

.local/share is not

Note you do not get a directory listing of .local, only of the contents

>
> However:
>
> oc@OpenBSD:~$ mkdir .hidden
> oc@OpenBSD:~$ touch .hidden/test-file
> oc@OpenBSD:~$ ls -R

.hidden is a hidden directory

>
><same as above and ./.hidden is not appearing>
>
> It looks like "ls -R" is showing some hidden directories but not all.
>

This pretty much all matches between base and coreutils ls as long as
they are given the same options. Slight difference in that coreutils
print .: on the first line and base ls doesn't.