exa describe itself as the "A modern version of ‘ls’. https://the.exa.website/".
I'm using exa instead of ls locally.
Here are my aliases making this official.
alias l='exa' alias la='exa -a' alias ll='exa -lah' alias ls='exa --color=auto'
Try it out.
Top comments (4)
The thing that puts me off exa is the same as with things like oh-my-zsh:
lsuses colours to distinguish file types.
lsknows about symlinks.
lsis small and fast and just one single file. On my system it's 10% the size of
exaand over 300% faster, while using 20% as much CPU.
I'm not saying it's bad, but I am saying that the reasons it might be good are not the ones people are pushing.
Personally, I prefer the way
lshandles colours. It colourises only the file/directory name or the little symbol for "executable", etc.
exalooks like a wall of colour, with everything vying for attention.
The only thing I see
gitintegration and the highlighting of the current username.
This is an anti-feature as far as I'm concerned. We already have a separate
treecommand, and it already does one thing, well.
@moopet I like the default settings from exa. The colors provides more information and it I got used with its output really fast.
exaoutput is different from the
lscommand but I like it better.
I can always use
\lswhen I need the raw
Important detail: I just use exa locally. In servers I keep using the plain old
lsand thats why the size of the command don't affect me so much.
nice can't keep using
exwhich enters in Ex mode. Using this instead
alias ls='exa --grid --color=auto --icons'. I don't like long lists :)