Timeline for Manipulate file name piped from find command
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 8, 2013 at 4:48 | vote | accept | Howard Dierking | ||
| Jan 6, 2013 at 21:29 | comment | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | @d34dh0r53 What edge case? The thread you link to doesn't point any. | |
| Jan 6, 2013 at 21:28 | history | edited | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | edited tags; edited tags; edited tags | |
| Jan 6, 2013 at 21:27 | answer | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | timeline score: 9 | |
| Jan 6, 2013 at 7:27 | comment | added | d34dh0r53 | actually there are edge cases where xargs is more suitable than exec. See this stackpost stackoverflow.com/questions/896808/find-exec-cmd-vs-xargs for a case in point. | |
| Jan 6, 2013 at 6:58 | comment | added | Howard Dierking | yes (as I noted below), so long as I can still do the string manipulation on each result of the find command (e.g. the {} member) | |
| Jan 6, 2013 at 1:16 | answer | added | 0xFF | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jan 6, 2013 at 1:08 | comment | added | ixtmixilix | There's no reason to use xargs with find. It comes with an -exec option. Can you just add the command you are going to use to your question, and someone can show you the correct find command? | |
| Jan 6, 2013 at 0:06 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 6, 2013 at 0:45 | |||||
| Jan 5, 2013 at 23:49 | history | asked | Howard Dierking | CC BY-SA 3.0 |