All over the place (tutorials, manuals, articles, questions and answers) I see
the advice to use the null feature of find (-print0) and xargs (-0) to be able
to handle any kind of wacky file name (e.g. filenames with newlines). Granted,
*if* you are going to pipe find into xargs, the advice mak
> All over the place (tutorials, manuals, articles, questions and answers) I
> see the advice to use the null feature of find (-print0) and xargs (-0) to be
> able to handle any kind of wacky file name (e.g. filenames with newlines).
> Granted, *if* you are going to pipe find into xargs, the ad
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021, at 09:59, Sean MacLennan wrote:
> The -exec flag spawns a new process for every file match.
Even when you use multiple arguments per command as with
-exec '{}' +
? It is still spawning a new process for every file match?
> This can be
> slow if you have a lot of files.
> Even when you use multiple arguments per command as with
> -exec '{}' +
> ? It is still spawning a new process for every file match?
No, then it will use the maximum number of file arguments allowed by your shell
for each process.
On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 08:26:40AM -0400, Greg Reagle wrote:
> All over the place (tutorials, manuals, articles, questions and answers) I
> see the advice to use the null feature of find (-print0) and xargs (-0) to be
> able to handle any kind of wacky file name (e.g. filenames with newlines).
