ls and ls -l disagree

[Ed Falk]

In article <1990Aug14.232737.16902 at rice.edu> gbarker at mph.sm.ucl.ac.uk (Dr Gareth J. Barker) writes:

>Can anyone explain the following discrepancy between the output of ls and
>ls -l on an NFS mounted file system with client and server both running
>4.1?
>
>First, sitting on the mount point (/mounts/reo0) just after mounting the
>file system:
>
>titan# /bin/ls
>bev         lost+found
>titan# /bin/ls -l
>lost+found not found 
>bev not found
>total 0

Disclaimer: I'm speaking as an end-user, not as a systems guru.

I don't have any idea what the problem is, but here's a possible hint:
"ls" just needs to open the directory, "ls -l" also needs to stat every
file.

	-ed falk, sun microsystems -- sun!falk, falk at sun.com
	"What are politicians going to tell people when the
	Constitution is gone and we still have a drug problem?"
			-- William Simpson, A.C.L.U.