![]() Many a program failed utterly when a text field had a quote mark or a leading pace, etc. I even have a database test item in all databases I made, called the "O'Reilly" test. Nowadays, we need to support all file names, even "O'Reilly's Army.txt". Also, it's an old habit from the days when you only got 8 chars to say it. ![]() Most techies I've worked with use the 3-fingers-on-one-hand-2-on-the-other method, and they like to use short variable name, don't like to comment, and in general cannot be counted on to help with the user doc. Maybe because, unlike most programmers, I can type with ten figures at a normal writing speed - few people need more than 40 words per minute to type as fast as they can compose. I'm a big fan of English language file names, that is, not something like RSFunc97Stat.txt. It doesn't crap out as soon as it hits the space. Now if your file name is /home/he/Documents/00 - Writing/02 The Rapture of the Maiden/0 - Text/25th/Rapture, pt 1-4, ch 01-20 old.txt, I use the C-shell, as I was a berkeley/Sun user at the Lab, but the same ideas apply in bash. To get it to work on anyįile system, EG NTFS, you need to quote the $PWD. Garbage if you have actual file names, not Unix-style file The problem is $PWD, which results in useless Is there a faster way to do what I am trying to do than to use find? However, it is a ton to type, and it is certainly not as fast as using ls with grep. This will give me a nice format (It also includes the user, group, size, and last date of access, which are helpful). If I just use find without ls or grep, then it goes faster, but it is a bunch to type: find $PWD/ -type f -name file.name -printf '%M %u %g %s\t%a\t%p\r\n' I can use ls integrated with find and grep to get the output in exactly the format that I want, and I could use something like this: ls -ault `find $PWD/ -type f` | grep file.nameīut this is extremely slow, I'm guessing because two commands are actually running. I would prefer to use ls because it is the fastest, and I would type: ls -alR $PWD/īut this doesn't show the file's path, so if I grep'ed the output, then I would see file permissions, but not the directory from which it originated. I want to do this so that I can grep out what I want, so that when I run the command, I can get just the matching files, their permissions, and their full paths, like: | grep file.name Together, the find-exec command combination gives you endless possibilities for doing things in the Linux command line.I have done a bit of searching online, and I am trying to find a way to recursively list all files with their absolute path and with their permissions. The examples I shared here are just a glimpse. ![]() The exec command gives you the ability to work on the result of the find command. The basic syntax to execute find with exec is as follows: find -exec \ įind is an already powerful command for searching files based on a number of criteria. Using exec command with the output of find command This tutorial will focus on combining find and exec commands. There is already a detailed article on xargs command. You have two ways to execute other commands on the result of the find command: You cannot just pipe redirect the find command output to another command. You can take your findings to the next level by actually doing specific operations on the found files.įor example, you found all the files with. The find command in Linux is an excellent tool to find files and directories based on given criteria.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |