Why ls without -l return 1 when permission to directory is r--

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP

up vote
3
down vote

favorite

I have read this and this, and found that my problem is different and more specific.

I understand the following points.

• +x on the directory grants access to files inodes through this specific directory


• meta information of a file, which is used by ls -l, is stored in its i-node, but file name does not belong to that

From the 2 points above, since ls without -l does not need to access the i-nodes of the files in the directory, it should successfully list the file names and return 0.

However, when I tried it on my machine, the file names are listed, but there were some warnings like permission denied, and the return code is 1.

b03705028@linux7 [~/test] chmod 500 permission/
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] ls --color=no permission/
f1*
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] chmod 400 permission/
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] ls --color=no permission/
ls: 無法存取 'permission/f1': 拒絕不符權限的操作
f1
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] echo $0
bash

The Chinese characters basically talk about permission denied

My unix distribution is Linux 4.17.11-arch1

permissions directory ls

share|improve this question

edited 9 mins ago

asked 1 hour ago

David Chen

1184

New contributor

David Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Hi David, unfortunately I cannot reproduce your problem. Using bash rm -rf lala; mkdir lala; chmod 400 lala; command ls lala is successful for me. The command only makes sure that no alias ofls is used. Could you please extend your question with the exact commands you type in to show the problem? (i.e., make a minimal working demonstration of what you observe)
  – stefan
  40 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Hi stefan, I use echo $0 to verify that I'm using bash too. May I ask which Unix distribution are you using? I've updated the problem to include the commands I used.
  – David Chen
  37 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  What happens if you run /bin/ls directly? It's very likely that you have an alias or function in your shell that's making it try to get file stats. The * at the end of f1 makes me think there's the -F flag
  – Stephen Harris
  31 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @StephenHarris Yeah that's the reason. problem solved. you guys are amazing.
  – David Chen
  26 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Yes, I assume that your ls is an alias and uses the -F flag to classify the filles, see ls(1). This would try to access f1 in order to classify it and append an asterisk. Using ls --color=no only appends to the alias. Try command ls instead. I'm using ArchLinux, should not make a difference.
  – stefan
  25 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

up vote
3
down vote

favorite

I have read this and this, and found that my problem is different and more specific.

I understand the following points.

• +x on the directory grants access to files inodes through this specific directory


• meta information of a file, which is used by ls -l, is stored in its i-node, but file name does not belong to that

From the 2 points above, since ls without -l does not need to access the i-nodes of the files in the directory, it should successfully list the file names and return 0.

However, when I tried it on my machine, the file names are listed, but there were some warnings like permission denied, and the return code is 1.

b03705028@linux7 [~/test] chmod 500 permission/
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] ls --color=no permission/
f1*
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] chmod 400 permission/
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] ls --color=no permission/
ls: 無法存取 'permission/f1': 拒絕不符權限的操作
f1
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] echo $0
bash

The Chinese characters basically talk about permission denied

My unix distribution is Linux 4.17.11-arch1

permissions directory ls

share|improve this question

edited 9 mins ago

asked 1 hour ago

David Chen

1184

New contributor

David Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Hi David, unfortunately I cannot reproduce your problem. Using bash rm -rf lala; mkdir lala; chmod 400 lala; command ls lala is successful for me. The command only makes sure that no alias ofls is used. Could you please extend your question with the exact commands you type in to show the problem? (i.e., make a minimal working demonstration of what you observe)
  – stefan
  40 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Hi stefan, I use echo $0 to verify that I'm using bash too. May I ask which Unix distribution are you using? I've updated the problem to include the commands I used.
  – David Chen
  37 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  What happens if you run /bin/ls directly? It's very likely that you have an alias or function in your shell that's making it try to get file stats. The * at the end of f1 makes me think there's the -F flag
  – Stephen Harris
  31 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @StephenHarris Yeah that's the reason. problem solved. you guys are amazing.
  – David Chen
  26 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Yes, I assume that your ls is an alias and uses the -F flag to classify the filles, see ls(1). This would try to access f1 in order to classify it and append an asterisk. Using ls --color=no only appends to the alias. Try command ls instead. I'm using ArchLinux, should not make a difference.
  – stefan
  25 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

up vote
3
down vote

favorite

up vote
3
down vote

favorite

I have read this and this, and found that my problem is different and more specific.

I understand the following points.

• +x on the directory grants access to files inodes through this specific directory


• meta information of a file, which is used by ls -l, is stored in its i-node, but file name does not belong to that

From the 2 points above, since ls without -l does not need to access the i-nodes of the files in the directory, it should successfully list the file names and return 0.

However, when I tried it on my machine, the file names are listed, but there were some warnings like permission denied, and the return code is 1.

b03705028@linux7 [~/test] chmod 500 permission/
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] ls --color=no permission/
f1*
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] chmod 400 permission/
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] ls --color=no permission/
ls: 無法存取 'permission/f1': 拒絕不符權限的操作
f1
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] echo $0
bash

The Chinese characters basically talk about permission denied

My unix distribution is Linux 4.17.11-arch1

permissions directory ls

share|improve this question

edited 9 mins ago

asked 1 hour ago

David Chen

1184

New contributor

David Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

I have read this and this, and found that my problem is different and more specific.

I understand the following points.

• +x on the directory grants access to files inodes through this specific directory


• meta information of a file, which is used by ls -l, is stored in its i-node, but file name does not belong to that

From the 2 points above, since ls without -l does not need to access the i-nodes of the files in the directory, it should successfully list the file names and return 0.

However, when I tried it on my machine, the file names are listed, but there were some warnings like permission denied, and the return code is 1.

b03705028@linux7 [~/test] chmod 500 permission/
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] ls --color=no permission/
f1*
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] chmod 400 permission/
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] ls --color=no permission/
ls: 無法存取 'permission/f1': 拒絕不符權限的操作
f1
b03705028@linux7 [~/test] echo $0
bash

The Chinese characters basically talk about permission denied

My unix distribution is Linux 4.17.11-arch1

permissions directory ls

permissions directory ls

share|improve this question

edited 9 mins ago

asked 1 hour ago

David Chen

1184

New contributor

David Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this question

edited 9 mins ago

asked 1 hour ago

David Chen

1184

New contributor

David Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this question

share|improve this question

edited 9 mins ago

edited 9 mins ago

edited 9 mins ago

asked 1 hour ago

David Chen

1184

New contributor

David Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 1 hour ago

David Chen

1184

asked 1 hour ago

David Chen

1184

1184

New contributor

David Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

New contributor

David Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

David Chen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Hi David, unfortunately I cannot reproduce your problem. Using bash rm -rf lala; mkdir lala; chmod 400 lala; command ls lala is successful for me. The command only makes sure that no alias ofls is used. Could you please extend your question with the exact commands you type in to show the problem? (i.e., make a minimal working demonstration of what you observe)
  – stefan
  40 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Hi stefan, I use echo $0 to verify that I'm using bash too. May I ask which Unix distribution are you using? I've updated the problem to include the commands I used.
  – David Chen
  37 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  What happens if you run /bin/ls directly? It's very likely that you have an alias or function in your shell that's making it try to get file stats. The * at the end of f1 makes me think there's the -F flag
  – Stephen Harris
  31 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @StephenHarris Yeah that's the reason. problem solved. you guys are amazing.
  – David Chen
  26 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Yes, I assume that your ls is an alias and uses the -F flag to classify the filles, see ls(1). This would try to access f1 in order to classify it and append an asterisk. Using ls --color=no only appends to the alias. Try command ls instead. I'm using ArchLinux, should not make a difference.
  – stefan
  25 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 1 more comment

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Hi David, unfortunately I cannot reproduce your problem. Using bash rm -rf lala; mkdir lala; chmod 400 lala; command ls lala is successful for me. The command only makes sure that no alias ofls is used. Could you please extend your question with the exact commands you type in to show the problem? (i.e., make a minimal working demonstration of what you observe)
  – stefan
  40 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Hi stefan, I use echo $0 to verify that I'm using bash too. May I ask which Unix distribution are you using? I've updated the problem to include the commands I used.
  – David Chen
  37 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  What happens if you run /bin/ls directly? It's very likely that you have an alias or function in your shell that's making it try to get file stats. The * at the end of f1 makes me think there's the -F flag
  – Stephen Harris
  31 mins ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @StephenHarris Yeah that's the reason. problem solved. you guys are amazing.
  – David Chen
  26 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Yes, I assume that your ls is an alias and uses the -F flag to classify the filles, see ls(1). This would try to access f1 in order to classify it and append an asterisk. Using ls --color=no only appends to the alias. Try command ls instead. I'm using ArchLinux, should not make a difference.
  – stefan
  25 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

Hi David, unfortunately I cannot reproduce your problem. Using bash rm -rf lala; mkdir lala; chmod 400 lala; command ls lala is successful for me. The command only makes sure that no alias ofls is used. Could you please extend your question with the exact commands you type in to show the problem? (i.e., make a minimal working demonstration of what you observe)
– stefan
40 mins ago

Hi David, unfortunately I cannot reproduce your problem. Using bash rm -rf lala; mkdir lala; chmod 400 lala; command ls lala is successful for me. The command only makes sure that no alias ofls is used. Could you please extend your question with the exact commands you type in to show the problem? (i.e., make a minimal working demonstration of what you observe)
– stefan
40 mins ago

Hi stefan, I use echo $0 to verify that I'm using bash too. May I ask which Unix distribution are you using? I've updated the problem to include the commands I used.
– David Chen
37 mins ago

Hi stefan, I use echo $0 to verify that I'm using bash too. May I ask which Unix distribution are you using? I've updated the problem to include the commands I used.
– David Chen
37 mins ago

What happens if you run /bin/ls directly? It's very likely that you have an alias or function in your shell that's making it try to get file stats. The * at the end of f1 makes me think there's the -F flag
– Stephen Harris
31 mins ago

What happens if you run /bin/ls directly? It's very likely that you have an alias or function in your shell that's making it try to get file stats. The * at the end of f1 makes me think there's the -F flag
– Stephen Harris
31 mins ago

@StephenHarris Yeah that's the reason. problem solved. you guys are amazing.
– David Chen
26 mins ago

@StephenHarris Yeah that's the reason. problem solved. you guys are amazing.
– David Chen
26 mins ago

Yes, I assume that your ls is an alias and uses the -F flag to classify the filles, see ls(1). This would try to access f1 in order to classify it and append an asterisk. Using ls --color=no only appends to the alias. Try command ls instead. I'm using ArchLinux, should not make a difference.
– stefan
25 mins ago

Yes, I assume that your ls is an alias and uses the -F flag to classify the filles, see ls(1). This would try to access f1 in order to classify it and append an asterisk. Using ls --color=no only appends to the alias. Try command ls instead. I'm using ArchLinux, should not make a difference.
– stefan
25 mins ago

 | 
show 1 more comment

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

up vote
4
down vote



accepted

I suspect ls in your case is an alias to something like ls --color=auto; in that case, ls tries to find information about the files contained inside the directory to determine which colour to use.

ls --color=no

should list the directory without complaining.

If it still complains, then you may be using another option, like -F or --classify, that needs to access file metadata (-F/--classify looks at the file type, for example).

To be sure that you run ls without going through an alias, use either of

command ls

or

ls

To remove an alias for ls, use

unalias ls

share|improve this answer

edited 16 mins ago

Kusalananda

113k15217345

answered 1 hour ago

Stephen Kitt

154k23340409

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Thank you for the answer. I just tried ls --color=no, but the result is exactly the same. I also checked /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc, and there are no such aliases. Am I missing something?
  – David Chen
  1 hour ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @DavidChen What does type ls return?
  – Kusalananda
  35 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @Kusalananda ls is alias of「ls --color -F」 I guess -F here is the reason why I still get return code as 1 even using --clor=no?
  – David Chen
  28 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @DavidChen Yes, that option needs to access the filetype of each file.
  – Kusalananda
  27 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @Kusalananda I know this is kind of unrelated to the original question, but where can the alias be defined other than /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc?
  – David Chen
  20 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 3 more comments

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

David Chen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

 

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name Email

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f480083%2fwhy-ls-without-l-return-1-when-permission-to-directory-is-r%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name Email

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

active

oldest

votes

active

oldest

votes

up vote
4
down vote



accepted

I suspect ls in your case is an alias to something like ls --color=auto; in that case, ls tries to find information about the files contained inside the directory to determine which colour to use.

ls --color=no

should list the directory without complaining.

If it still complains, then you may be using another option, like -F or --classify, that needs to access file metadata (-F/--classify looks at the file type, for example).

To be sure that you run ls without going through an alias, use either of

command ls

or

ls

To remove an alias for ls, use

unalias ls

share|improve this answer

edited 16 mins ago

Kusalananda

113k15217345

answered 1 hour ago

Stephen Kitt

154k23340409

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Thank you for the answer. I just tried ls --color=no, but the result is exactly the same. I also checked /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc, and there are no such aliases. Am I missing something?
  – David Chen
  1 hour ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @DavidChen What does type ls return?
  – Kusalananda
  35 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @Kusalananda ls is alias of「ls --color -F」 I guess -F here is the reason why I still get return code as 1 even using --clor=no?
  – David Chen
  28 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @DavidChen Yes, that option needs to access the filetype of each file.
  – Kusalananda
  27 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @Kusalananda I know this is kind of unrelated to the original question, but where can the alias be defined other than /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc?
  – David Chen
  20 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 3 more comments

up vote
4
down vote



accepted

I suspect ls in your case is an alias to something like ls --color=auto; in that case, ls tries to find information about the files contained inside the directory to determine which colour to use.

ls --color=no

should list the directory without complaining.

If it still complains, then you may be using another option, like -F or --classify, that needs to access file metadata (-F/--classify looks at the file type, for example).

To be sure that you run ls without going through an alias, use either of

command ls

or

ls

To remove an alias for ls, use

unalias ls

share|improve this answer

edited 16 mins ago

Kusalananda

113k15217345

answered 1 hour ago

Stephen Kitt

154k23340409

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Thank you for the answer. I just tried ls --color=no, but the result is exactly the same. I also checked /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc, and there are no such aliases. Am I missing something?
  – David Chen
  1 hour ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @DavidChen What does type ls return?
  – Kusalananda
  35 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @Kusalananda ls is alias of「ls --color -F」 I guess -F here is the reason why I still get return code as 1 even using --clor=no?
  – David Chen
  28 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @DavidChen Yes, that option needs to access the filetype of each file.
  – Kusalananda
  27 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @Kusalananda I know this is kind of unrelated to the original question, but where can the alias be defined other than /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc?
  – David Chen
  20 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 3 more comments

up vote
4
down vote



accepted

up vote
4
down vote



accepted

I suspect ls in your case is an alias to something like ls --color=auto; in that case, ls tries to find information about the files contained inside the directory to determine which colour to use.

ls --color=no

should list the directory without complaining.

If it still complains, then you may be using another option, like -F or --classify, that needs to access file metadata (-F/--classify looks at the file type, for example).

To be sure that you run ls without going through an alias, use either of

command ls

or

ls

To remove an alias for ls, use

unalias ls

share|improve this answer

edited 16 mins ago

Kusalananda

113k15217345

answered 1 hour ago

Stephen Kitt

154k23340409

I suspect ls in your case is an alias to something like ls --color=auto; in that case, ls tries to find information about the files contained inside the directory to determine which colour to use.

ls --color=no

should list the directory without complaining.

If it still complains, then you may be using another option, like -F or --classify, that needs to access file metadata (-F/--classify looks at the file type, for example).

To be sure that you run ls without going through an alias, use either of

command ls

or

ls

To remove an alias for ls, use

unalias ls

share|improve this answer

edited 16 mins ago

Kusalananda

113k15217345

answered 1 hour ago

Stephen Kitt

154k23340409

share|improve this answer

share|improve this answer

edited 16 mins ago

Kusalananda

113k15217345

edited 16 mins ago

Kusalananda

113k15217345

edited 16 mins ago

Kusalananda

113k15217345

113k15217345

answered 1 hour ago

Stephen Kitt

154k23340409

answered 1 hour ago

Stephen Kitt

154k23340409

answered 1 hour ago

Stephen Kitt

154k23340409

154k23340409

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Thank you for the answer. I just tried ls --color=no, but the result is exactly the same. I also checked /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc, and there are no such aliases. Am I missing something?
  – David Chen
  1 hour ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @DavidChen What does type ls return?
  – Kusalananda
  35 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @Kusalananda ls is alias of「ls --color -F」 I guess -F here is the reason why I still get return code as 1 even using --clor=no?
  – David Chen
  28 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @DavidChen Yes, that option needs to access the filetype of each file.
  – Kusalananda
  27 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @Kusalananda I know this is kind of unrelated to the original question, but where can the alias be defined other than /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc?
  – David Chen
  20 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 3 more comments

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  Thank you for the answer. I just tried ls --color=no, but the result is exactly the same. I also checked /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc, and there are no such aliases. Am I missing something?
  – David Chen
  1 hour ago
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @DavidChen What does type ls return?
  – Kusalananda
  35 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @Kusalananda ls is alias of「ls --color -F」 I guess -F here is the reason why I still get return code as 1 even using --clor=no?
  – David Chen
  28 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @DavidChen Yes, that option needs to access the filetype of each file.
  – Kusalananda
  27 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  @Kusalananda I know this is kind of unrelated to the original question, but where can the alias be defined other than /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc?
  – David Chen
  20 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

Thank you for the answer. I just tried ls --color=no, but the result is exactly the same. I also checked /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc, and there are no such aliases. Am I missing something?
– David Chen
1 hour ago

Thank you for the answer. I just tried ls --color=no, but the result is exactly the same. I also checked /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc, and there are no such aliases. Am I missing something?
– David Chen
1 hour ago

@DavidChen What does type ls return?
– Kusalananda
35 mins ago

@DavidChen What does type ls return?
– Kusalananda
35 mins ago

@Kusalananda ls is alias of「ls --color -F」 I guess -F here is the reason why I still get return code as 1 even using --clor=no?
– David Chen
28 mins ago

@Kusalananda ls is alias of「ls --color -F」 I guess -F here is the reason why I still get return code as 1 even using --clor=no?
– David Chen
28 mins ago

@DavidChen Yes, that option needs to access the filetype of each file.
– Kusalananda
27 mins ago

@DavidChen Yes, that option needs to access the filetype of each file.
– Kusalananda
27 mins ago

@Kusalananda I know this is kind of unrelated to the original question, but where can the alias be defined other than /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc?
– David Chen
20 mins ago

@Kusalananda I know this is kind of unrelated to the original question, but where can the alias be defined other than /etc/bash.bashrc and ~/.bashrc?
– David Chen
20 mins ago

 | 
show 3 more comments

David Chen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

 

draft saved

draft discarded

David Chen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

David Chen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

David Chen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

 

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name Email

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f480083%2fwhy-ls-without-l-return-1-when-permission-to-directory-is-r%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name Email

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name Email

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name Email

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name Email

Name Email

Name

Email

Name Email

Name

Email