On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 4:31 AM Bernhard Voelker <m...@bernhard-voelker.de> wrote: > > On 3/27/21 10:16 PM, James Youngman wrote: > > Personally, I would probably use -delete to avoid the overhead of -exec > > entirely (the explicit -depth is essentially only there for documentation): > > > > find . -depth \( -path '*0/*' -o -path '*0' \) -delete > __________________________^^______________^^ > > Just to clarify further: the above pattern for -path is not the same > as specifying '-name 0', because it would match any file or directory > which ends on "0", like e.g. "dir0". > > The following is therefore closer to the original (yet still avoiding > to spawn a separate process): > > find . -depth \( -path '*/0/*' -o -path '*/0' \) -delete > or > find . -depth \( -path '*/0/*' -o -name 0 \) -delete
The above seems to be the best answer for the specific case of delete directories found by -name 0. It avoids calling external programs. > As James mentioned, explicitly specifying -depth is not necessary as it > is implied by -delete, still it comes handy when you first want to have > a look which files would be deleted by exchanging -delete by -print; > it would still enforce the depth-first method: > > find . -depth \( -path '*/0/*' -o -name 0 \) -print It is also good to have this to check what is to be deleted beforehand. -- Regards, Peng
