[bug #13650] find -exec rm -i {} ; broken since 4.2.12

Follow-up Comment #9, bug #13650 (project findutils): Changing it certainly is not out of the question, but I am trying to bear in mind the bug report at bug #3992. ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #13774] Why is updatedb prefering /var/tmp over /tmp for temporary files?

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #13774 (project findutils): Traditionally /var/tmp has greater capacity, and is not memory-backed. GNU sort uses a mixture of RAM and temporary files, spilling out to disk for datasets larger than "--buffer-size". Therefore it's especially silly to use /tmp for scra

[bug #13774] Why is updatedb prefering /var/tmp over /tmp for temporary files?

Update of bug #13774 (project findutils): Severity: 3 - Normal => 2 - Minor Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => jay Release

Re: [bug #13774] Why is updatedb prefering /var/tmp over /tmp for temporary files?

> This was originally reported by Arthur Korn in http://bugs.debian.org/317815 > > updatedb by default uses /var/tmp for temporary files. > > | We had a problem today on one system where /var would be full every > | night. We figured out that /var/tmp/ was full with hundreds of megabytes > | of f

(no subject)

, we are the sole company that was an approved supplier for U.S. Navy Exchange In Taiwan from 1960s to 1973 . Our products are listed as follows: Police patches, Armed forces patches, Lions Club International badges, Rotary International badges, Junior Chamber of Commerce badges, golf club badg

[bug #13774] Why is updatedb prefering /var/tmp over /tmp for temporary files?

URL: Summary: Why is updatedb prefering /var/tmp over /tmp for temporary files? Project: findutils Submitted by: None Submitted on: Tue 07/12/05 at 13:05 Categ

[bug #13650] find -exec rm -i {} ; broken since 4.2.12

Follow-up Comment #8, bug #13650 (project findutils): Jay wrote: > I understand but that is not how -ok works Yes I realized that. :-) Is it going to change or is it to difficult? (I am sure somebody could come up with a sensible usage of -ok ) If changing is out of question (for whatever reaso

[bug #13650] find -exec rm -i {} ; broken since 4.2.12

Follow-up Comment #7, bug #13650 (project findutils): i understand, but that's not how -ok works. OK is like -exec, it doesn;t just ask it actually runs the command. Hence the nearest thing to what you're talking about that would actually work is find ... -ok true {} \; -a -exec rm -i {} \;

[bug #13650] find -exec rm -i {} ; broken since 4.2.12

Follow-up Comment #6, bug #13650 (project findutils): Hello, sorry my incoherent mail. I was actually thinking about (the useless example) find ... -ok rm -i {} \; which I'd expect to ask twice: first find asks, and if that succeeded would pass on stdin/out to rm which ask again. cu an

[bug #12491] updatedb broken with solaris su

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #12491 (project findutils): Sorry for the massively late response. It seems the latet release (4.2.23) works fine. Many thanks, Tim Bishop. ___ Reply to this item at: