On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:10:43 -0600, "Theo de Raadt" wrote: > Todd C. Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:06:12 -0600, "Theo de Raadt" wrote: > > > > > Todd C. Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > The point of that example is to show how to safely use xargs. Since > > > > find now has its own built-in xargs support perhaps we should adapt > > > > the example to use that instead. > > > > > > Does it not matter that the xargs solution is maximally portable in > > > scripts, but the builtin isn't (widely implimented... but...) > > > > I think these days the builtin xargs is more portable than the > > non-standard -print0 option. > > That sounds weird. -print0 is really old.
It was originally a GNUism but it never made it into POSIX. We added it a long time ago but I don't see it in Solaris or AIX. Surprisingly, HP-UX supports it. The built-in xargs was added to find instead in POSIX around 2001 or so. There is some history at: https://collaboration.opengroup.org/external/pasc.org/interpretations/unofficial/db/p1003.2/pasc-1003.2-210.html As far as modern systems go, the built-in xargs is more portable. - todd
