Peng Yu writes:
> I find that "-exec test ..." can be slower than "-exec $(which test)
> ...". Is possible that `find` internally use "which", so that users
> don't need to explicitly call it?
It's possible, I suppose, but the semantics of -exec can be changed by
turning the program name into a s
On 03/26/2015 01:40 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
> For my case, it is about 10% time difference.
This is quite much - well, a real program other than test would
probably do much more processing and therefore making the overhead
for searching the executable in PATH make smaller in percentage.
How does your $
For my case, it is about 10% time difference.
On Wednesday, March 25, 2015, Bernhard Voelker
wrote:
> On 03/25/2015 11:39 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
> > I find that "-exec test ..." can be slower than "-exec $(which test)
> > ...". Is possible that `find` internally use "which", so that users
> > don't
On 03/25/2015 11:39 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
> I find that "-exec test ..." can be slower than "-exec $(which test)
> ...". Is possible that `find` internally use "which", so that users
> don't need to explicitly call it? Thanks.
How much slower is it for you?
In my test case, the findutils repository
Hi,
I find that "-exec test ..." can be slower than "-exec $(which test)
...". Is possible that `find` internally use "which", so that users
don't need to explicitly call it? Thanks.
--
Regards,
Peng
