Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:06:13 -0800 From: Chip <chip@wiegand.org> To: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: 'find' is running all by itself Message-ID: <3A1B4635.B11990D0@wiegand.org> References: <3A19E749.E9E048E2@wiegand.org> <00112117251600.37336@shalimar.net.au> <3A1A880A.25BC4A01@wiegand.org> <00112212092503.05727@shalimar.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Zero Sum wrote: > > On Wednesday 22 November 2000 01:34, Chip wrote: > > Zero Sum wrote: > > > > > > On Tuesday 21 November 2000 16:15, Chip wrote: > > > > John P. Campbell wrote: > > > > > > > > > > A look at /etc/periodic/daily on my box shows that find runs quite > > > often. > > > > > It's a good chance that is what you are seeing. > > > > > > > > > > <rubina>: jpc % cd /etc/periodic/daily/ > > > > > <rubina>: daily % grep find * > > > > > > > > I tried this command as you have it shown above and get > > > > daily: command not found > > > > Besides that, in my daily directory is a whole bunch of stuff, > > > > and > > > > find is not amoung any of it. Should it be? It's not any big > > > > deal, > > > > I'm just curious where it's starting and what is telling it to > > > > start. None of the other fbsd machines do this. > > > > > > > > > > This is a joke, right? > > > > > > You didn't really fail to recognise the '%' as a c-shell prompt, did > you? > > > > > > You didn't type "daily % grep find *" instead of "grep find *", did you? > > > > > > You weren't really expecting the 'find' command to be there were you? > > > > > > If the answer to ANY one of the aboce was yes, then you need to get > > > yourself some basic books on Unix. Asking questions here won't do you > much > > > good as you won't understand the answers. > > > > > > The explanation that was given you was most probably accurate. You > > > mightcheck the system time, though. > > > > > > Geoff > > > -- > > > count@shalimar.net.au > > > Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione > > > > I am quite sure that you too were once a beginner in the *nix > > environment. I doubt very much that you were born with all this > > great store house of knowledge. Maybe it has been so long that > > you have forgotten those days of learning though, and now don't > > have the patience for people who are learning, so feel compelled > > to lash out at them in a childish manner. A serious question > > should only be returned with a serious answer, which most people > > on this list do. You appear to be an exception, I'm sorry. > > > > You misjudge me. I was genuinely incredulous. I don't consider that I have > "great storehouse of knowlege". And no, I wasn't born with what I do have, > but I was born learning to look at what I see. I have plenty of sympathy > for beginners, and I provide quite a bit of help to those I can help both > on list and (mainly) off-list. In fact I usually pick the beginners to > help, because they need it most and for five years I wrote and taught Unix > courses in the industry. Okay, my apologies for the misjudgement > However, it is a lot easier to help people who think and analyise what they > see. For example, you were provided with two lines of shell code, and you > completely failed to look at it with any degree of analysis. > > The lines were... > > <rubina>: jpc % cd /etc/periodic/daily/ > <rubina>: daily % grep find * In my narrow 'unix' experience, the only 'unix' boxes I have seen are the ones here in my house (six of 'em, all freebsd). The all have prompts that look like this - $ or chip# I've never seen one like the above examples. > Now the first one is a 'cd' command. Surely that is obvious. I could not > and cannot believe that it could be misconstrued. That tells you that > "<rubina>: jpc % " was the prompt. Is there any way in which this could be > more obvious? Is there any way in which you could have failed to interpret > this if you *looked* at it? yes it is obvious that it is a cd command, I know a cd command > For the second line, the prompt has clearly changed and reflects the > directory to which the last command changed. Note the 'daily'. Again, > what could be more obvious when you *look*. > > This leaves only "grep find * " as the command to use. Not "daily %....". > This isn't a matter of "great storehouse of knowlege", it is a matter of > basic attitude. "Thinking about things" vs "silver platter". Right, as I mentioned above, I haven't seen a prompt with a : in it, so was confused. I did get it straight and answered the other person who responed with a message to that effect. > I said to you "If the answer to ANY one of the aboce was yes, then you need > to get yourself some basic books on Unix. Asking questions here won't do > you much good as you won't understand the answers". Doesn't the above > *prove* that statement. You asked a question, you got a good reply and you > didn't even understand the most basic two lines of code that could probably > be written. A "cd" and a "grep". I gave you good (and necessary) advice. > if you want to take it as a put down, that's your problem. I guess I looked at it this way - a question being answered with a question is not being answered at all. Now, I am the type of person who expects a statement for answer, such as 'You might try this-n-this-n-this' or 'Take a look at such-n-such'. To me asking 'This is a joke right?' is not an answer at all, by any stretch of the imagination. > When I first encountered Unix, there was no help available, I was in the > "commercial" world and the only access to the internet was in the > "acadaemic world". So even the (then limited) Internet was not available. > O'Reilly didn't exits and there were no readily available books on Unix. > > So, what did I have? "man" and that was it. I would recommend to anyone > on first encountering Unix to (1) Read, learn and understand everything on > the "man sh" or "man ksh" pages. (2) Read every other man page on the > system. You won't understand every thing on every page, but you will start > to see paterns involved, and you will learn much and remember where to find > things. (3) Make a listing of every file on the system (yes, every one!) > and find out why they are there and what they do. Cross each one off the > list as you find out. But that is too much like work, isn't it? (Learning > usually is). I do have a few 'unix' books, but that doesn't mean I am going to know what every differant prompt looks like in every version of every shell. > As for not having patience and lashing out in a childish manner. My take > on it is this. There is no reason to have patience with those who ask > questions and do not listen to the answers (or think about them). To want > things handed to you on a "silver platter" is childish, to protest when > silliness is pointed out is childish. If you think I "lashed out" you must > have had a very "gentle" life. > > If you consider I am ill-mannered, I like you consider what sort of manners > are involved, when somebody (not me) gave you a good answer to your > question and you effectively "ignored" it. Whyfore then, should I be > "gentle"? Ah, but I didn't ignore it, I tried and tried again, and got it right, and sent that person an email regarding this. Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean I ignored it. > Geoff > -- > count@shalimar.net.au > Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message So, whether or not you accept my reasons or apology is neither here nor there, I am learning and make mistakes, I am also not afraid to admit it when I do. That, too, is part of the learning process. Good Day, -- Chip W. www.wiegand.org Alternative Operating Systems To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3A1B4635.B11990D0>