Unix Commands I Abuse Every Day

Post by gnaritas » Thu, Sep 06, 2012, 4:34 PM UTC

masklinn wrote: post #61

gnaritas wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

find ./ -name '*.log' -print0 | xargs -0 rm Fixes that issue and xargs is far more efficient, it doesn't launch a new process for each line like exec does, but far more importantly, xargs is generalizable to all commands so you only have to learn it once; exec is just an ugly hack on find, you can't generalize it across all commands; xargs is much more unixy.

> it doesn't launch a new process for each line like exec does Exec doesn't either if you use "+" as a terminator: find . $(options) -exec command {} \; executes one command per match, find . $(options) -exec command {} + executes a single command with all matches > exec is just an ugly hack on find Obvious and complete nonsense, -exec is both an important predicate of find and a useful and efficient tool. -print0/xa…

Post by ralph » Thu, Sep 06, 2012, 6:33 PM UTC

gnaritas wrote: post #100

ralph wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wanting to remove the files was so common that some finds have it built-in. Avoids even the overhead of -exec rm {} +. find -name '*.log' -delete

True, but the issue isn't removing files, the issue is generalizing a command for mapping output of a command to another command. rm was just a simple example. xargs is far more useful than simply deleting files.

Post by dredmorbius » Thu, Sep 06, 2012, 7:09 PM UTC

Post by gnaritas » Thu, Sep 06, 2012, 8:13 PM UTC

ralph wrote: post #103

gnaritas wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but the issue isn't removing files, the issue is generalizing a command for mapping output of a command to another command. rm was just a simple example. xargs is far more useful than simply deleting files.

Removing files is a common need coupled with find yet many readers don't know of -delete; I was pointing it out. That doesn't weaken xargs's valid uses. You seem a little defensive? :-)