Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on August 24, 2006 11:15 PM
> The statement in the article is factually incorrect.
Yes, and so are many statements in print, television, and the www. The author has been notified (assuming they even read the comment) and I agree, the information in the article should be corrected. However, I believe that for most it will be enough that they mentioned the possibility of a program's output as being problematic. It would be unrealistic to expect the article to know what everyone's scenario will be. The inaccuracy about controlling the output of "ls" is noteworthy, but benign in comparison to the article as a whole.
There are false statements made elsewhere that are far more arrogant and dangerous than the one made here and in every case it's up to the reader to find the truth. Comments can help, but they're are just as susceptible to their accuracy.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:ls color
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on August 24, 2006 11:15 PMYes, and so are many statements in print, television, and the www. The author has been notified (assuming they even read the comment) and I agree, the information in the article should be corrected. However, I believe that for most it will be enough that they mentioned the possibility of a program's output as being problematic. It would be unrealistic to expect the article to know what everyone's scenario will be. The inaccuracy about controlling the output of "ls" is noteworthy, but benign in comparison to the article as a whole.
There are false statements made elsewhere that are far more arrogant and dangerous than the one made here and in every case it's up to the reader to find the truth. Comments can help, but they're are just as susceptible to their accuracy.
#