Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:37:16 +0100 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd@celestial.com Subject: Re: first of misc questions.... Message-ID: <20070426003716.62ab4062@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <20070425215326.GA25614@ayn.mi.celestial.com> References: <20070425072914.GA65634@thought.org> <462F0824.5000107@infracaninophile.co.uk> <ed5f4bce0704251331v735ccedet947318e8d2a6fbe1@mail.gmail.com> <20070425212318.GA5247@saltmine.radix.net> <20070425215326.GA25614@ayn.mi.celestial.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:53:26 -0700 Bill Campbell <freebsd@celestial.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2007, Thomas Dickey wrote: > >On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 10:31:45PM +0200, Irsla wrote: > >> On 4/25/07, Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> wrote: > >> > > >> > find . -type f \( -mtime 6 -o -mtime 29 \) -print0 | xargs -0 > >> > vi > >> > > >> > >> what about the -exec option of find ? I always wonder why people > >> don't use it. > > > >it's simpler but not necessarily as efficient. > > How could it be as efficient as it executes the -exec for every thing > that find finds? Xargs groups the output (except under rare > circumstances where one might specify that it run the command for > each argument). This is one of those things that isn't actually true, but has been repeated so many times that people have come to believe it. The -exec option can be made to pass multiple arguments if it's used correctly.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070426003716.62ab4062>