Re: [PATCH] doc: add PDF file to the online manual [was: [bug #54856] A Bit Unclear -execdir Documentation]

I'm happy to switch to the gnulib tooling.

Re: fts: find -xdev, FTS_XDEV and POSIX issue http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1133

James Youngman wrote: Do the gnulib maintainers feel that the creation of the FTW_MOUNT/FTW_XDEV dichotomy in POSIX nftw() justifies an analogous thing in fts()? Yes, that sounds right.

[PATCH] doc: add PDF file to the online manual [was: [bug #54856] A Bit Unclear -execdir Documentation]

Hi James, On 5/5/19 6:39 PM, James Youngman wrote: > I've updated the docs on the web and added the tool I used to do it in > the findutils source tree. The patch (which I already pushed) is > attached. Improvements welcome! The attached adds the PDF file to the script generating the online man

Re: [bug #54913] find: "-type"-test wrong on bind-mounted char device

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 7:01 PM Bernhard Voelker wrote: > The only alternative I can currently think of is to check the mountlist > for the given ent->fts_path before not taking over the FTS information. Historically, checking the mountlist has been problematic because (a) symbolic links to mount

[bug #55417] Minor Typo

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #55417 (project findutils): Normally I would follow the latest stable release, but in practice it's been so long since we did a release that was easier to update from head than a tagged historic release. ___ Reply

fts: find -xdev, FTS_XDEV and POSIX issue http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1133

Eric mailed the findutils list a while back to point out that POSIX will standardise a new -mount option for find which is similar to -xdev but differs in the way the mount point itself is handled. I believe that the POSIX nftw() library function also gets a new option FTW_XDEV, Somewhat confusi

[bug #55417] Minor Typo

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #55417 (project findutils): Hi James, cool. Do you like to have inter-version updates in the web manual, too, or do you prefer that it reflects the last released version? Have a nice day, Berny ___ Reply to this

[bug #42318] find with xdev traverses other filesystem when mountpiont is subdirectory

Follow-up Comment #14, bug #42318 (project findutils): I gave an explanation for my reluctance in my comment #11. However, since POSIX will specify both -mount and -xdev we will follow the POSIX specification. This trumps my concern about user-surprising behaviour since POSIX non-compliance wou

Re: Can't say "if File is older than file" over the phone

On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 8:16 PM Bernhard Voelker wrote: > @James: WDYT? That looks good to me, thanks for pushing the change. James.

Re: Document that find -maxdepth is a GNU extension

Hi James, On 5/4/19 2:06 AM, James Youngman wrote: > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 7:28 AM Bernhard Voelker > wrote: >> >> On 4/16/19 6:41 AM, Andreas Metzler wrote: >>> As a find user I would rather see the info manual dropped than the >>> manpage. > > My recollection of user feedback is that most us

[bug #47220] Assertion "fdleak.c:382: complain_about_leaky_fds" during find

Update of bug #47220 (project findutils): Category:None => xargs Item Group:None => Wrong result Status:None => Invalid Assigned to:

[bug #47220] Assertion "fdleak.c:382: complain_about_leaky_fds" during find

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #47220 (project findutils): The patch Pavel mentioned is now applied in Git, it's 5699fb78d44a9f5064f98459178ee8e7fa159645 ___ Reply to this item at: _

[patch #9799] Use GNU_FINDUTILS_FD_LEAK_CHECK for xargs as well

Update of patch #9799 (project findutils): Status:None => Done Assigned to:None => jay ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Thank you for th

[bug #56198] Typo in xargs.1: 'ouptut'

Update of bug #56198 (project findutils): Status:None => Fixed Assigned to:None => jay ___ Reply to this item at:

Re: RFE: "-mtype" + -menc

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 8:09 AM Bernhard Voelker wrote: > This RFE is falling into a category where find(1) ought to inspect the > content of the files in the directory hierarchy. > > It is already documented [1] that find(1) only works on specifics of files > in the file system (name, size, owner

[bug #55417] Minor Typo

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #55417 (project findutils): The source tree now has a tool for automating these updates, build-aux/update-online-manual.sh. There is a brief explanation of hwo to use it in find-maint.texi. ___ Reply to this item

Re: [bug #54856] A Bit Unclear -execdir Documentation

I've updated the docs on the web and added the tool I used to do it in the findutils source tree. The patch (which I already pushed) is attached. Improvements welcome! From 755a22b9820d554d1dd8b82fd3c3ad1d3d688c81 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: James Youngman Date: Sun, 5 May 2019 16:49:12 +0100

[bug #54856] A Bit Unclear -execdir Documentation

Update of bug #54856 (project findutils): Status:None => Fixed ___ Follow-up Comment #7: I have updated the documentation at https://www.gnu.org/software/findutils/manual/find.html to

Re: The returned value of -prune and its documentation

On 4/30/19 1:09 PM, Cristian Zoicas wrote: > The manual page of find says the following for the -prune action: > > -prune >True; if the file is a directory, do not descend into it. If -depth is >given, false; no effect. Because -delete implies -depth, you cannot >usefully