[bug #13041] -i and - shouldn't be exclusive

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #13041 (project findutils): BTW, I am aware that in this case I can just omit the ‘-i’ and the replace string ‘{}’. However, in the general case, I want to run “scp {} [EMAIL PROTECTED]:dir”, without having one separate process for each file (which requires separate aut

[bug #13041] -i and - shouldn't be exclusive

URL: Summary: -i and - shouldn't be exclusive Project: findutils Submitted by: None Submitted on: Mon 05/09/2005 at 23:59 Category: xargs Sever

[bug #12999] find "-regex" doesn't honor "bounds"

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #12999 (project findutils): This problem is fixed in the CVS code for findutils. To resolve your problem, you could either wait for the next official release of findutils, or check out a copy of the code from the CVS repository for findutils.

[bug #12999] find "-regex" doesn't honor "bounds"

Update of bug #12999 (project findutils): Item Group:None => Wrong result Status:None => Fixed Assigned to:None => jay ___

Re: find -name when name contains a slash

On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 10:20:26AM +0100, Avis, Ed wrote: > % find . -name foo/bar > > Actual output: nothing > Desired output: warning: don't be silly, Unix filenames can't contain > a slash. Good idea. I implemented something slightly different:- $ ./find . -name quux/umsp ./find: warning: Un

Small change in find

I haven't read any of the bugs/requests/etc, so please forgive me if this is a common request. I have often thought that with the find command, the semicolon should be optional on a -exec or -ok command when it is the last command in the line. For instance: find /path -type f -exec ls -l '{}'

find -name when name contains a slash

% find . -name foo/bar Actual output: nothing Desired output: warning: don't be silly, Unix filenames can't contain a slash. Alternatively, it could list all files called foo which are inside a directory called bar under the current directory (which is what I was kind of hoping for). -- Ed Avis