tag 21218 notabug thanks On 08/07/2015 06:01 PM, Sneeh, Eddie wrote: > Hi, > I believe there is a problem with ls -d (unless the intent is to just list > 1 directory). Thanks for the report. However, I think you have misunderstood the purpose of -d. Try this for comparison: touch file ls . file ls -d . file All -d does is to list command line arguments that are directories as the name of the directory itself, rather than descending and showing the directory's contents. > Say I have a dir mydir, it has directories d1 and d2, and files f1 and f2. > I want to list only d1 and d2. How do I do that? I tried ls -d but that > doesn't seem to work: > \ls -d mydir > returns: mydir > \ls -d mydir/* > returns: mydir/d1 mydir/d2 mydir/f1 mydir/f2 > but f1 and f2 are files. If you want to list ONLY directories, use a glob that guarantees only directories can be matched: ls -d mydir/*/ The trailing slash can only match directories, and will therefore skip ordinary files. Or, you can use find: find mydir -mindepth 1 -maxdepth 2 -type d I'm closing this as not a bug as ls is working as designed, but feel free to ask further questions. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--- End Message ---