11–20 of 29 posts
i use GNU parallel exclusively in place of xargs simply because it has --dry-run.
wouldn't an "echo" just do the same? $ mkdir a $ cd a $ touch b c d e $ find -type f | xargs echo rm rm ./b ./d ./e ./c $ ls b c d e $ find -type f | xargs rm $ ls $
i use GNU parallel exclusively in place of xargs simply because it has --dry-run.
Nice. I just had to check to see if xargs has a similar feature. It doesn't, though the --no-run-if-empty and --verbose options are both handy. I believe I've used xargs with "echo " to proof output before committing it. You can simply re-run that piped to bash (or your shell of choice) to execute commands if you wish (say, if parallel isn't available). E.g., echo foo bar baz | xargs -n1 -t echo ls | bash ... will ex…
Wow, I must have reinvented this particular wheel at least five times.
Anybody have a link to a version viewable without proprietary plugins? "Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations"
http://www.luga.de/Angebote/Vortraege/GNU_Parallel_LIT_2011/...
I use parallel all the time for embarrasingly parallel scientific computations on a cluster. It is very easy to use and elegant, and it's one of the programs I'm most grateful for. Recently the developers fixed a major bug for me, that child jobs on other nodes would not be killed when parallel was killed. This was the only thing stopping me from recommending it to my labmates, now there's no reason not to use it!
Wow, I must have reinvented this particular wheel at least five times.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
wouldn't an "echo" just do the same? $ mkdir a $ cd a $ touch b c d e $ find -type f | xargs echo rm rm ./b ./d ./e ./c $ ls b c d e $ find -type f | xargs rm $ ls $
One advantage of "parallel --dry-run" over "xargs echo" is that the former quotes its output: $ touch 'Ham Jam Spam' $ touch 'J.R. "Bob" Dobbs' $ find . -type f -print0 | parallel -n1 -0 --dry-run echo echo ./Ham' 'Jam' 'Spam echo ./J.R.\ \"Bob\"\ Dobbs $ find . -type f -print0 | xargs -n1 -0 echo echo echo ./Ham Jam Spam echo ./J.R. "Bob" Dobbs For my own "dry runs", though, I've always preferred passing the command…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
wouldn't an "echo" just do the same? $ mkdir a $ cd a $ touch b c d e $ find -type f | xargs echo rm rm ./b ./d ./e ./c $ ls b c d e $ find -type f | xargs rm $ ls $
One advantage of "parallel --dry-run" over "xargs echo" is that the former quotes its output: $ touch 'Ham Jam Spam' $ touch 'J.R. "Bob" Dobbs' $ find . -type f -print0 | parallel -n1 -0 --dry-run echo echo ./Ham' 'Jam' 'Spam echo ./J.R.\ \"Bob\"\ Dobbs $ find . -type f -print0 | xargs -n1 -0 echo echo echo ./Ham Jam Spam echo ./J.R. "Bob" Dobbs For my own "dry runs", though, I've always preferred passing the command…
echo './Ham
Jam
Spam'
$ find . -type f -print0 | xargs -n1 -0 perl -e'print "\"$_\" " for (@ARGV)'
"./Ham
Jam
Spam"