Paul Eggert wrote:
On 09/04/2012 06:55 PM, Linda A. Walsh wrote:
So how do delete all files in the directory without wild cards?
Why tie your hands behind your back? Use wild cards:
cd DIRECTORY && rm -fr * .[!.] .??*
If you do this a lot, put it into a shell script.
It's not li
Torbjorn Granlund wrote:
> Jim Meyering writes:
>
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>
> > Torbjorn Granlund wrote:
> >> The very old factoring code cut from an now obsolete version GMP does
> >> not pass proper arguments to the mpz_probab_prime_p function. It ask
> >> for 3 Miller-Rabin tests only,
Eric Blake wrote:
> On 09/04/2012 10:42 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Jim Meyering wrote:
>>
>>> > Torbjorn Granlund wrote:
>>
>> Problem numbers are of the for N=pq, p,q prime and (p-1)/(q-1) = s,
>
> s/for/form/
Fixed. Thanks.
On 09/05/2012 08:25 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 09/04/2012 06:55 PM, Linda A. Walsh wrote:
>
>> So how do delete all files in the directory without wild cards?
>
> Why tie your hands behind your back? Use wild cards:
>
> cd DIRECTORY && rm -fr * .[!.] .??*
>
> If you do this a lot, put it i
On 09/04/2012 06:55 PM, Linda A. Walsh wrote:
> So how do delete all files in the directory without wild cards?
Why tie your hands behind your back? Use wild cards:
cd DIRECTORY && rm -fr * .[!.] .??*
If you do this a lot, put it into a shell script.
It's not like the need is all that commo
Paul Eggert wrote:
On 09/04/2012 04:21 PM, Linda A. Walsh wrote:> Paul Eggert wrote:
expecting it to do nothing useful other than issue an error?
Sure. People might expect the utility to complain about
what they consider to be obvious typos, rather than to
remove files they don't exp
On 09/04/2012 04:21 PM, Linda A. Walsh wrote:> Paul Eggert wrote:
> expecting it to do nothing useful other than issue an error?
Sure. People might expect the utility to complain about
what they consider to be obvious typos, rather than to
remove files they don't expect to be removed. For examp
Please keep the mailing list in the reply. I have set Reply-To accordingly.
Bala Murugan wrote:
> I am using bash shell. When I tried to do this i getting this.I am getting
> this error.
>
> [balamup2@cl-flor-dvvm026 ~]$ echo $SHELL
> */bin/bash*
I am sure that those '*' characters are not ther
Hi Bob,
thanks for u r reply.
See i will explain u neatly.
I am using bash shell. When I tried to do this i getting this.I am getting
this error.
[balamup2@cl-flor-dvvm026 ~]$ echo $SHELL
*/bin/bash*
[balamup2@cl-flor-dvvm026 ~]$ ls
*test1.txt test3.txt testdir test.txt*
[balamup2@cl-flor-dvv
Paul Eggert wrote:
On 09/04/2012 10:46 AM, Linda A. Walsh wrote:
I would assert that the trailing "." shouldn't be stripped either.
If we were designing anew, I'd be inclined to agree with you.
But there are probably people expecting the standard behavior now,
i.e. expecting i
Pádraig Brady writes:
Sure. I was just quantifying the performance change,
for others who may be referencing or noticing patches.
(Actually, I'd add a note to the commit message that,
this increases calculations by about 25%).
And surely mode for certain cases. We spend 25/3 or about 8
On 09/04/2012 07:10 PM, Torbjorn Granlund wrote:
Pádraig Brady writes:
On 09/04/2012 03:46 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> There are 9008992 composites of the form with s=2 below 2^64. With 3
> Miller-Rabin test, one would expect about 9008992/4^64 = 140766 to be
s/4^64/64/ ?
For
Pádraig Brady writes:
On 09/04/2012 03:46 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> There are 9008992 composites of the form with s=2 below 2^64. With 3
> Miller-Rabin test, one would expect about 9008992/4^64 = 140766 to be
s/4^64/64/ ?
For what it's worth I checked the million primes in
the
Eric Blake wrote:
POSIX does indeed say that, but it applies only when you use 'rm' in a
standards-compliant invocation; the moment you add --no-preserve-root to
your invocation, you are no longer using a standards-compliant
invocation, so all bets are off as far as POSIX goes.
--
Whic
Jim Meyering writes:
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Torbjorn Granlund wrote:
>> The very old factoring code cut from an now obsolete version GMP does
>> not pass proper arguments to the mpz_probab_prime_p function. It ask
>> for 3 Miller-Rabin tests only, which is not sufficient.
>
> Hi
On 09/03/2012 10:29 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>> Coreutils has already implemented an exception for the root
>> directory: --no-preserve-root (whatever this would be useful
>> for except investigating what'd happen in a VM ...).
> ---
> And by doing so has violated posix, since it doesn't say that if
On 09/04/2012 10:46 AM, Linda A. Walsh wrote:
> I would assert that the trailing "." shouldn't be stripped either.
If we were designing anew, I'd be inclined to agree with you.
But there are probably people expecting the standard behavior now,
and there's an argument for not departing from the sta
On 09/04/2012 11:46 AM, Linda A. Walsh wrote:
> POSIX is portability standard -- it should not
> be regarded as a restrictive standard, unless not doing so would hinder
> portability. In effect, they are disallowing OS's to make extensions
> beyond
> what they allow in the newer standards...
That
Jim Meyering wrote:
These commands would evoke an invalid diagnostic:
$ mkdir d && ln -s d s && env rm -r s/
rm: cannot remove 's': Too many levels of symbolic links
remove.c was stripping trailing slashes from "s/" before passing
the name to "rm". But a trailing slash may change the sem
On 09/04/2012 10:42 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>
>> > Torbjorn Granlund wrote:
>
> Problem numbers are of the for N=pq, p,q prime and (p-1)/(q-1) = s,
s/for/form/
--
Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com+1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signat
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Torbjorn Granlund wrote:
>> The very old factoring code cut from an now obsolete version GMP does
>> not pass proper arguments to the mpz_probab_prime_p function. It ask
>> for 3 Miller-Rabin tests only, which is not sufficient.
>
> Hi Torbjorn
>
> Thank you for the patch an
Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 09/04/2012 04:46 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> incvolving 3 or more prime factors.) When s = 2, we get the 3/4 factor.
>
> s/incvolving/involving/
Pádraig Brady wrote:
> Miller-Rabin test, one would expect about 9008992/4^64 = 140766 to be
s/4^64/64/ ?
Fixed both. Than
Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 09/04/2012 02:55 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> With the following patch, I see new behavior.
>> It's an improvement, but we're still not there:
>>
>> $ mkdir -p d/e/f; ln -s d s; rm -r s/
>> rm: cannot remove 's/': Not a directory
>> [Exit 1]
>> $ find
>>
On 09/04/2012 04:46 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> incvolving 3 or more prime factors.) When s = 2, we get the 3/4 factor.
s/incvolving/involving/
Have a nice day,
Berny
Torbjorn Granlund wrote:
> The very old factoring code cut from an now obsolete version GMP does
> not pass proper arguments to the mpz_probab_prime_p function. It ask
> for 3 Miller-Rabin tests only, which is not sufficient.
Hi Torbjorn
Thank you for the patch and explanation.
I've converted th
On 09/04/2012 02:55 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> With the following patch, I see new behavior.
> It's an improvement, but we're still not there:
>
> $ mkdir -p d/e/f; ln -s d s; rm -r s/
> rm: cannot remove 's/': Not a directory
> [Exit 1]
> $ find
> .
> ./s
> ./d
>
> N
The very old factoring code cut from an now obsolete version GMP does
not pass proper arguments to the mpz_probab_prime_p function. It ask
for 3 Miller-Rabin tests only, which is not sufficient.
I am afraid the original poor code was wrritten by me, where this
particular problem was introduced wi
Paul Eggert wrote:
> I was about to suggest the following, on GNU/Linux:
>
> # Don't do this unless you know what you're doing!
> rm -fr /proc/self/cwd/
>
> Except it doesn't work! Not even if I append '.':
>
> $ mkdir /tmp/victim
> $ cd /tmp/victim
> $ touch foo
> $ rm -fr /proc/self
On 09/04/2012 12:42 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> I have mixed feelings, but am leaning towards the
> Solaris 11/FreeBSD behavior.
They must have fixed it for Solaris, here's an older one:
$ uname -sr ; mkdir d; ln -s d s; /bin/rm -r s/; ls
SunOS 5.9
d
Have a nice day,
Berny
Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 09/03/2012 10:20 PM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>> the question is what rm should remove:
>> the symlink or the target?
>
> The convention in POSIX is that if a symlink is
> followed by '/', it's dereferenced. So this does
> appear to be a bug in coreutils 'rm'.
>
> I confirm
30 matches
Mail list logo
