| 1 |
On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 05:31:13PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wednesday 23 January 2008, Steve Long wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Or even: find blah -exec sed 'blah "blah"' + |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> we specifically discourage `find -exec` in favor of `find -print0 | xargs -0` |
| 6 |
> because it sucks. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
In what way? I'm not aware of any problems with find -exec ... {} + that |
| 9 |
are handled any better by find -print0 | xargs -0. It's too bad that you |
| 10 |
can only add {} + at the very end of the command, but that's just as |
| 11 |
much a problem with xargs -0. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Your reply didn't make it clear, but you're aware of the difference |
| 14 |
between -exec {} ; and -exec {} +, right? The former executes a single |
| 15 |
command for every file, while the latter builds one long argument list |
| 16 |
when possible, the same way xargs does. |
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives