Well, if we're going to play "what's the most convoluted way you can think of to do something with a much simpler equivalent," then I should point out that you need to modify your suggestion thusly:
find . -maxdepth 1 \( -name .\* -o -print \) |sed -e 's/^\.\///' |xargs ls -d
First, unless you give the "-d" option to "ls," you'll get a listing of the contents of any directories whose names are output by "find." (Or is that what the original user wanted? Somehow I don't think so.)
Second, the names "find" prints (and which "ls" will subsequently reproduce in its output) will have "./" as a prefix, so the "sed" command is needed to remove them. This would also be true if you used the default starting directory for "find" (i.e., if you omit the "." argument).
Personally, plain old "ls" works well for me.
God!... Is this all my 25 years of using Unix is worth?
Randall Schulz
Mountain View, CA USA
At 09:29 2002-11-14, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
Well, if you really want something equivalent to 'ls *', you'd need to do something likefind . -maxdepth 1 \( -name .\* -o -print \) | xargs ls The "-maxdepth 1" is to not descend recursively into directories, and the "-name .\*" is to avoid listing hidden files/directories (which would not be matched by the '*' glob). The "-type f" is actually wrong, as '*' will match directories as well. Also beware that ls may be an alias, and xargs will run the actual executable in the path... Igor
-- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
