Re: Problems with "find" 4.2.27

The remote file system is ext3. Upgrading findutils fixed the problem. Thank you for your time and assistance. > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 8/11/2006 5:52 PM: >> I've been having problems with "find&q

Re: Problems with "find" 4.2.27

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 8/11/2006 5:52 PM: > I've been having problems with "find", and it's hard to search the entire > mailing list for "find" since it's such a common word. I don't know wha

Problems with "find" 4.2.27

I've been having problems with "find", and it's hard to search the entire mailing list for "find" since it's such a common word. I don't know what cygwin package "find" comes in, so I can't search for that. I don't know if this pr

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of William Blunn > Sent: 13 December 2004 15:11 > > I was using Microsoft Outlook Express, which does not support > > format=flowed. > > Turns out this is not entirely true. > > Outlook Express *does* have some support for format=flowe

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

I was using Microsoft Outlook Express, which does not support format=flowed. Turns out this is not entirely true. Outlook Express *does* have some support for format=flowed, but not as much as Thunderbird. Using the default setting of "Encode Text Using" = "None" (as opposed to "quoted-printabl

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

[snip] > I am now using Thunderbird 1.0, which does support format=flowed. > > So *this* message should come out nicely for everyone, both > in e-mail and in the archive, *and* with no extra effort > required on my part. > Hmmm, sehr intressant. Flows fine in Outlook 2003, but I don't know if

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

I have been doing some reading today, and have come across RFC3676 (which supersedes RFC2646) which describes format=flowed. http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3676.html A bit of a revelation. format=flowed wasn't what I thought it might be, but it turned out to be much better. It doesn't look that

Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?"

t; >Well, after spending a ridiculous amount of time playing around with >this (it was fun!), >I decided to add it to the "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?" >FAQ after all. It appears that Linux works around the '.' '..' UDF >problem at the

Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?"

urity. Sure, I guess > you could make that argument. I thought you were implying that the > find/-noleaf problem you ran into was the norm for ISO/UDF media with Windows > and Cygwin yet not for Linux/UNIX. Well, after spending a ridiculous amount of time playing around with this (it was

Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?"

At 07:54 AM 7/13/2004, you wrote: >On 2004-07-08, Larry Hall wrote: >> At 10:02 AM 7/8/2004, you wrote: >> >My point is this: >> > >> >Whilst this is not an issue with Cygwin per se, the nature of Cygwin >> >means that this issue will tend to arise commonly with Cygwin, and tend >> >not to aris

Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?"

commonly with Cygwin, and tend > >not to arise under traditional unixes. > > > Why's that? Traditional unixes have been around for longer. Cygwin contains more to do with joining together stuff which has origins in different paradigms, so you are likely to see more problem

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> At 08:47 PM 7/11/2004, you wrote: > >> On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 09:54:05AM -0500, Eduardo Chappa wrote: > >> >That was CGF himself, he volunteered to not to volunteer. > He brought > >> >this topic onto himself. > >> > >> This statement is disingenuous. For shame. > >> > > > >Perhaps, perhaps

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

At 08:47 PM 7/11/2004, you wrote: >> On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 09:54:05AM -0500, Eduardo Chappa wrote: >> >That was CGF himself, he volunteered to not to volunteer. He brought >> >this topic onto himself. >> >> This statement is disingenuous. For shame. >> > >Perhaps, perhaps not. I'm still wait

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 09:54:05AM -0500, Eduardo Chappa wrote: > >That was CGF himself, he volunteered to not to volunteer. He brought > >this topic onto himself. > > This statement is disingenuous. For shame. > Perhaps, perhaps not. I'm still waiting for somebody, other than you Chris[1],

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 09:54:05AM -0500, Eduardo Chappa wrote: >That was CGF himself, he volunteered to not to volunteer. He brought this >topic onto himself. This statement is disingenuous. For shame. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: htt

Pine maintainer gone (Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?"))

On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Brian E. Gallew wrote: :) > On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:37:10AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: :) [random, pointless verbiage deleted] :) :) Chris, can we just *plonk* this idiot already? Is this what you call meanness of this list?, you have a lot to learn about being mean. In

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, GARY VANSICKLE wrote: :) > >I never used the word "fix", please do not misunderstand me. I refer :) > >to this as "enhance". Yes, it is broken, by the way. :) > :) > So, it's "broken" and you want me to "enhance" it so that it won't be :) > "broken" anymore but you were not sug

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

GARY VANSICKLE wrote: Nobody's trying to force you to read. You shouldn't try to force them to write in a particular style. In the end communication, at least civil communication and I'd say any communication that is, in the long term, successsful, always requires *compromise* on both parties. Y

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:37:10AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: [random, pointless verbiage deleted] Chris, can we just *plonk* this idiot already? -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http:/

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Robert McNulty Junior wrote: > [snip] > I'm trying, however, to catch up on my cygwin updating. > Trying to figure out why GTK is telling me cygX11-6.dll (or something like > that) is missing. I hope we get a new X11 mainatainer soon. We do have an X11 maintainer. However, he

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> >I never used the word "fix", please do not misunderstand me. > I refer to > >this as "enhance". Yes, it is broken, by the way. > > So, it's "broken" and you want me to "enhance" it so that it > won't be "broken" anymore but you were not suggesting a > "fix". Got it. Can somebody show me w

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

om: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of GARY VANSICKLE Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 8:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?") > Nobody's trying to force you to

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> Nobody's trying to force you to read. You shouldn't try to > force them to write in a particular style. In the end > communication, at least civil communication and I'd say any > communication that is, in the long term, successsful, always > requires *compromise* on both parties. Your stated

RE: Extending long threads (was: RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?"))

> As a person who regularly uses HTML style email and posting > (much to many peoples chargrin and complaints) I rarely > "fester" them with "all" > sorts of colors and fonts. Other HTML emails and posts I > receive are also rarely "festered" with all sorts of colors > and fonts. Why? Because

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Responding before I read the whole thread, as I'm sure this gets a whole lot uglier: > > On Jul 9 11:03, William Blunn wrote: > > I think not. I think the counter argument would be "Yes we know it > > makes the occasional command-line appear line-wrapped, but > that is a > > nano-issue compa

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:37:10AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: >*** Christopher Faylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED])...: > >If I make this research, you do the change in the way the archives are >generated, so that all people in this thread be happy. Do we have a >deal? Here's how it works: You do the res

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

*** Christopher Faylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED])...: :) On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 10:24:22AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: :) >*** Christopher Faylor ...: :) >>Maybe you're being purposely obtuse. I don't know. My point was :) >>that if I send specially formatted text in my messages to a technical :) >

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 10:24:22AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: >*** Christopher Faylor ...: >>Maybe you're being purposely obtuse. I don't know. My point was that >>if I send specially formatted text in my messages to a technical >>mailing list I don't want the archiving software to unformat it

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

*** Christopher Faylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED])...: :) On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 09:18:30AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: :) >*** Christopher Faylor :) >([EMAIL PROTECTED])...: :) > :) >:) On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:27:55AM +0100, William Blunn wrote: :) >:) >I have set up several web-based systems which

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:38:11AM -0500, DePriest, Jason R. wrote: >On Friday, July 09, 2004 10:39 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote > >> On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:27:55AM +0100, William Blunn wrote: >>> I have set up several web-based systems which do this, and it wasn't >>> hard. >> >>> On Thu, Jul

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 09:18:30AM -0700, Eduardo Chappa wrote: >*** Christopher Faylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED])...: > >:) On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:27:55AM +0100, William Blunn wrote: >:) >I have set up several web-based systems which do this, and it wasn't >:) >hard. >:) >:) >On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 a

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Friday, July 09, 2004 10:39 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote > On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:27:55AM +0100, William Blunn wrote: >> I have set up several web-based systems which do this, and it wasn't >> hard. > >> On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 06:26:27PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>> Finally, you (

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

*** Christopher Faylor ([EMAIL PROTECTED])...: :) On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:27:55AM +0100, William Blunn wrote: :) >I have set up several web-based systems which do this, and it wasn't :) >hard. :) :) >On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 06:26:27PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: :) >>Finally, you (Igor)

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

This is a top post, sorry about that, I normally do not do this, but in order to show my point I will have to do it. Corinna, I agree with you 99.%, however, there's a consequence to your words that you are not seeing, which is this. Imagine that I were to read your post on a PDA, the w

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:03:00AM +0100, William Blunn wrote: >Think of it this way: If we had already accepted that the web archive >system wrapped flowed text, and someone came up arguing that it should >not "because it breaks long command lines", would they be given the time >of day? Let's se

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:27:55AM +0100, William Blunn wrote: >I have set up several web-based systems which do this, and it wasn't >hard. >On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 06:26:27PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>Finally, you (Igor) are right that we are not going to change the >>sourceware.org soft

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Dave Korn wrote: -Original Message- From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Andrew DeFaria Sent: 09 July 2004 16:03 Dave Korn wrote: There's another phrase that goes: "If you're archiving people's posts for all time, there is a moral obligation on you to archive them absolutely *verbatim* and not

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Brian Dessent wrote: William Blunn wrote: I only wish that I could go back in time and show the inventor of the havoc they have wreaked by making it turn off wrapping by default. I'm pretty sure you were joking here but if not... That's the whole point of PRE, that it *doesn't* wrap. It's for te

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Andrew DeFaria > Sent: 09 July 2004 16:03 > Dave Korn wrote: > > > There's another phrase that goes: > > > > "If you're archiving people's posts for all time, there is a moral > > obligation on you to archive them absolutely *verbat

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Corinna Vinschen wrote: Fact is, I dislike when people don't give a damn for existing common rules which have turned out to work fine for all other people. You are ascribing malintent where either ignorance or disagreement may be present. You are assuming they don't give a damn instead of the mo

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Dave Korn wrote: There's another phrase that goes: "If you're archiving people's posts for all time, there is a moral obligation on you to archive them absolutely *verbatim* and not tamper with, edit, reformat, or otherwise alter them." Never heard that one. Got a reference? -- Jack Kevorkian for

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Brian Dessent wrote: My main problem with it is that it breaks quoting. When I reply to a message with no line breaks, my mail program has to either A) pick an arbitrary margin and reflow the entire message to that margin, adding ">" to the first column of each line, or B) Insert a ">" at the b

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, William Blunn wrote: > Christopher Faylor quoted Igor Pechtchanski: > > On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 03:56:49PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > >I've already explained why I don't think format=flowed is appropriate > > >for this list (in particular, long command lines will also

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of William Blunn > Sent: 09 July 2004 12:30 > > That's the whole point of PRE, that it *doesn't* wrap. > > I don't think that is the whole point of PRE. > > I think the whole point of PRE is that newlines and other > whitespace in > th

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> Yeah it appears in ... [RFC1855] as "Be conservative in what you send > and liberal in what you receive.", just a few paragraphs above where > it recommends: > > "Limit line length to fewer than 65 characters and end a line with a > carriage return." Limiting line length to fewer than 65 cha

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

William Blunn wrote: > > That's the whole point of PRE, that it *doesn't* wrap. > > I don't think that is the whole point of PRE. > > I think the whole point of PRE is that newlines and other whitespace in > the HTML source are interpreted literally. > > It appears that the design committee too

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> > What really needs to be improved is mhonarc or whatever app is used to > > make the web archives. It should detect when the message contains no > > linebreaks and not use PRE but rather let the browser render it as > > normal text, so that it will be wrapped to the width of the screen as > > i

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

"Jon A. Lambert" wrote: > Yeah it appears in RFC1885 Sorry that's RFC 1855 -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

"William Blunn" wrote: > There is a phrase that goes: > > "Be permissive in what you accept, and strict in what you send" > > Now this is just a phrase, and by itself does not have significance. Yeah it appears in RFC1885 as "Be conservative in what you send and liberal in what you receive.",

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> > I only wish that I could go back in time and show the inventor of > > the havoc they have wreaked by making it turn off wrapping by default. > > I'm pretty sure you were joking here but if not... Actually I was serious. > That's the whole point of PRE, that it *doesn't* wrap. I don't think

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 10:34:01AM +0100, William Blunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brian Dessent wrote: > > RFC2822 (which obsoletes the old RFC822) states in section 2.2.1: > > > > There are two limits that this standard places on the number of > > characters in a line. Each line of characters

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Dave Korn wrote: > > What really needs to be improved is mhonarc or whatever app is used to > > make the web archives. It should detect when the message contains no > > linebreaks and not use PRE but rather let the browser render it as > > normal text, so that it will be wrapped to the width of t

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Jul 9 11:46, William Blunn wrote: > It does appear though that these rules are arbitrary, without benefit, > yet have identifiable problems, and their current sole purpose appears > to be to identify members of a club. If you want to see it that way, fine with me. Fact is, I dislike when peop

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> "If you're archiving people's posts for all time, there is a moral > obligation on you to archive them absolutely *verbatim* and not tamper > with, edit, reformat, or otherwise alter them." I wasn't suggesting tampering with them. Information should be preserved where possible. My contenti

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of Brian Dessent > Sent: 09 July 2004 12:02 > William Blunn wrote: > > > I only wish that I could go back in time and show the > inventor of > > the havoc they have wreaked by making it turn off wrapping > by default. > > I'm pretty

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

William Blunn wrote: > I only wish that I could go back in time and show the inventor of > the havoc they have wreaked by making it turn off wrapping by default. I'm pretty sure you were joking here but if not... That's the whole point of PRE, that it *doesn't* wrap. It's for text that's been

RE: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> -Original Message- > From: cygwin-owner On Behalf Of William Blunn > Sent: 09 July 2004 11:28 > > This seems like a reasonable discussion that can hopefully > resolve this > > issue once and for all, LOL, you haven't been on the internet long have you? > There is a phrase that goes

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> On Jul 9 11:03, William Blunn wrote: > > I think not. I think the counter argument would be "Yes we know it > > makes the occasional command-line appear line-wrapped, but that is a > > nano-issue compared to the downside which is that it will mess up the > > display for all the flowed messages,

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

William Blunn wrote: > I believe that at this point they are talking about the byte stream that > represents the encoded form of the message. > > If you are using quoted-printable encoding, then all encoded lines will > be 78 characters or less, and so will be fitting in with the "SHOULD" > speci

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> This seems like a reasonable discussion that can hopefully resolve this > issue once and for all, and so, IMO, belongs on the list rather than in > private e-mail. There is a phrase that goes: "Be permissive in what you accept, and strict in what you send" Now this is just a phrase, and b

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Jul 9 11:03, William Blunn wrote: > I think not. I think the counter argument would be "Yes we know it > makes the occasional command-line appear line-wrapped, but that is a > nano-issue compared to the downside which is that it will mess up the > display for all the flowed messages, which is

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> On Jul 9 10:36, William Blunn wrote: > > > My mail reader is no "modern" mail reader and I'm not interested to use > > > one since I'm old-fashioned enough to dislike the mouse. So my mail reader > > > is running in an 80 column window. > > > > > Unwrapped mails and weird line breaks drop my a

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Christopher Faylor quoted Igor Pechtchanski: > On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 03:56:49PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > >I've already explained why I don't think format=flowed is appropriate > >for this list (in particular, long command lines will also be wrapped > >if it ever were to be accepted). "L

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Jul 9 10:36, William Blunn wrote: > > My mail reader is no "modern" mail reader and I'm not interested to use > > one since I'm old-fashioned enough to dislike the mouse. So my mail reader > > is running in an 80 column window. > > > Unwrapped mails and weird line breaks drop my attention spa

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

> My mail reader is no "modern" mail reader and I'm not interested to use > one since I'm old-fashioned enough to dislike the mouse. So my mail reader > is running in an 80 column window. > Unwrapped mails and weird line breaks drop my attention span to read > the whole posting to a minimum. How

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Brian Dessent wrote: > RFC2822 (which obsoletes the old RFC822) states in section 2.2.1: > > There are two limits that this standard places on the number of > characters in a line. Each line of characters MUST be no more than 998 > characters, and SHOULD be no more than 78 characters, excluding th

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Jul 8 18:26, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 03:56:49PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > >I've already explained why I don't think format=flowed is appropriate > >for this list (in particular, long command lines will also be wrapped > >if it ever were to be accepted). In a

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Eduardo Chappa wrote: I happened to look at this message in Lynx and did not see anything bad about it, then it ocurred to me that you were referring to a GUI browser. This is the case when you are complaining about how it looks in your browser (probably most people browser), but it's not a defe

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

*** Brian Dessent ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote in the cygwin list today: :) Nowhere did I claim that SHOULD was equivalent to MUST. And yes I know :) the difference. :) :) My point was simply that if a RFC describes a normative procedure then :) that lends weight to the argument that if at all po

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Eduardo Chappa wrote: > :) It's just like HTML email - can I read it? Yes. Do I want it in my > :) inbox? Heck no. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you > :) should. > > Yes, you should read the definition of SHOULD in an RFC, did you do it, > no. Next time look for a better arg

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Brian Dessent wrote: :) > We may agree or disagree about format=flowed sent to this list, but :) > we have to agree that what was sent was an e-mail message, perfectly :) > valid e-mail message to a mailing list and not a web page to a web :) > site. :) :) RFC2822 (which obsole

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Eduardo Chappa wrote: > We may agree or disagree about format=flowed sent to this > list, but we have to agree that what was sent was an e-mail message, > perfectly valid e-mail message to a mailing list and not a web page to a > web site. RFC2822 (which obsoletes the old RFC822) states in sectio

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 03:56:49PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: >I've already explained why I don't think format=flowed is appropriate >for this list (in particular, long command lines will also be wrapped >if it ever were to be accepted). In any case, the definitive opinion >will be that of CG

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: :) We're using the same mailer. :-) Aside from that, most mailers can be :) configured to insert newlines automatically, and it's much easier to :) configure the mailer than to get a GUI browser to wrap lines in :) -formatted documents. I agree with y

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Eduardo Chappa wrote: > On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: > > :) > Any long lines coming into my mail reader are nicely wrapped > :) > according to whatever window width I configure. > :) > :) They are in mine too. But look at the web archive of your message: > :) <

Re: Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: :) > Any long lines coming into my mail reader are nicely wrapped :) > according to whatever window width I configure. :) :) They are in mine too. But look at the web archive of your message: :) . Igo

Wrapping long lines (Was Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?")

Bill, This seems like a reasonable discussion that can hopefully resolve this issue once and for all, and so, IMO, belongs on the list rather than in private e-mail. More below. On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, William Blunn wrote: > > While you can do nothing about the legal disclaimer (except, maybe, > >

Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?"

at this issue will tend to arise commonly with Cygwin, and tend > not to arise under traditional unixes. > > Perhaps it would be a good idea to mention this issue in the Cygwin FAQ? > > Possibly as a second point under the existing heading of "I'm having > basic pro

Re: FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?"

win per se, the nature of Cygwin means that this >issue will tend to arise commonly with Cygwin, and tend not to arise under >traditional unixes. Why's that? >Perhaps it would be a good idea to mention this issue in the Cygwin FAQ? > >Possibly as a second point under the

FAQ update suggestion for "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?"

ion this issue in the Cygwin FAQ? Possibly as a second point under the existing heading of "I'm having basic problems with find. Why?" We could have an extra paragraph that goes something like this: If find does not seem to be producing enough results, or seems to be missing out

Re: Problems with FIND

'type' reporting the first instance of a file that it finds isn't a problem. However, I will assume that when you run the 'find' command, that you're finding that the windows version of find is running and not the cygwin version, and that's your problem. The windows version of 'find' is found in

Problems with FIND

Hello, When I do 'type find', I pick up the Win find.exe. Well, how can I solve the problem? I am not expert enough and I could not find any information about that! Thanks a lot! Bastos == Fernando João Pereira de Bastos e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ===

Re: Re: Problems with find

compliance. (I'm presuming a bit here as to motivation for the fallback behavior for hard linking on FAT file systems.) Randall Schulz Franz > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Carlo Florendo wrote: > > > find . -name 1000.* > > > > - Original Message - > > F

Re: Re: Problems with find

158316 -rw-r--r--1 f.braunb unknown 162114808 Jan 31 08:33 1000.zip Could this be a bug? Franz > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Carlo Florendo wrote: > > > find . -name 1000.* > > > > - Original Message - > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: &l

RE: Problems with find

rue. You wanted a -o (or) between each pattern but really you can accomplish what you want with a quoted pattern, which IMHO is a more straight-forward way to look for what you want. Ian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Problems with find

TECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 5:57 PM > Subject: Problems with find > > > Hi folks, > > I trie to search file with find an didn't find all the file which should be > found > > I search for all file starting with 1000 an

RE: Problems with find

lish what you want with a quoted pattern, which IMHO is a more straight-forward way to look for what you want. Ian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: January 31, 2003 3:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Problems with fi

Re: Problems with find

* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (03-01-31 09:57 +0100) > I trie to search file with find an didn't find all the file which should be > found > > I search for all file starting with 1000 an the file 1000.zip in the > diretory 1000 is not found > $ find . -name 1000\* find -type f -name '1000*' > ./1000.zip

Re: Problems with find

find . -name 1000.* - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 5:57 PM Subject: Problems with find Hi folks, I trie to search file with find an didn't find all the file which should be found I search for all f

Problems with find

Hi folks, I trie to search file with find an didn't find all the file which should be found I search for all file starting with 1000 an the file 1000.zip in the diretory 1000 is not found $ find . -name 1000\* ./1000.zip ./1000 but when I ls the directory 1000 the file is listed $ ls 1000 1000.

RE: Problems with find -exec somecommand | tosomeother command

: Problems with find -exec somecommand | tosomeother command Hello, I'm attempting to find the number of lines in each file of a source directory. Using bash, I'm using the following command: find . -name "*.frm" -exec cat -n {} | tail -n1 \; but it returns the error cfind:

Re: Problems with find -exec somecommand | tosomeother command

Hi Randall, Thanks for the explanation and the working version. Best, Sheryl --- Randall R Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sheryl, > > [ Non-Cygwin-specific ] > > > Here's how I'd do this: > > find . -name "*.frm" -exec wc -l {} ; > > > The result looks something like this

Re: Problems with find -exec somecommand | tosomeother command

Sheryl, [ Non-Cygwin-specific ] Here's how I'd do this: find . -name "*.frm" -exec wc -l {} \; The result looks something like this (I changed the ".frm" suffix to ".java" for the purpose of finding some files on my system): 1114 ./DeferredUpdateKB.java 295 ./Definitor.ja

Problems with find -exec somecommand | tosomeother command

Hello, I'm attempting to find the number of lines in each file of a source directory. Using bash, I'm using the following command: find . -name "*.frm" -exec cat -n {} | tail -n1 \; but it returns the error cfind: missing argument to `-exec' tail: ;: No such file or directory I've tried vari