Re: Oracle8 question for Linux gurus

In article <LFTk2.251$24.896_at_news.ipass.net>, davesisk_at_ipass.net says...

>Another question:
>When I do an ls -la rc* (with pwd = /etc), I see that /rc.0 and /rc.2 are
>marked as directories. But if I try to cd rc.0 or rc.2, it gives the same
>"not found" message. I'm befuddled, can someone explain why this happens
>(and even exactly how these and the linking are used)?

This is subtle but simple. As a previous poster explained, the directories are

/etc/rc.d/rc0.d and /etc/rc.d/rc2.d

NOT /etc/rc0.d and /etc/rc2.d

When, in /etc, you do a "ls -la rc*" the shell expands this to "ls -la rc.d" which lists the contents of the directory rc.d (or fully, "/etc/rc.d"), which contains, among other things, rc0.d and rc2.d

In the same directory, try "ls -lad rc*", and it will show only "rc.d" The -d switch tells ls that if any of its arguments are directories, it should show information about that directory rather than the default behaviour of listing the contents of the directory.

It might help to know that when you type "ls -l" with no arguments, ls implicitly assumes "ls -l .", the currect directory, and lists its contents. If you type "ls -ld", then "ls -ld ." gets assumed, and you get info about the current directory instead.

Hope this helps. Received on Thu Jan 07 1999 - 09:04:56 CST