[bug #22715] find command for NETPATHS in updatedb is inconsistent with that for SEARCHPATHS

Update of bug #22715 (group findutils): Status: Postponed => None ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Mess

Re: Reg.. find command not working as expected in Ubuntu...

On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 07:37:10AM +1100, raf wrote: > On Sat, Dec 02, 2023 at 03:44:19PM +, Mannem Anil kumar > wrote: > > > Dear Concern, > > As i was exploring Linux related commands, i have executed the > > following command in terminal. Where that file

Re: Reg.. find command not working as expected in Ubuntu...

On Sat, Dec 02, 2023 at 03:44:19PM +, Mannem Anil kumar wrote: > Dear Concern, > As i was exploring Linux related commands, i > have executed the following command in terminal. Where that file is not > existed and find command not says that

Re: Reg.. find command not working as expected in Ubuntu...

I can't reproduce this claimed problem with findutils 4.9.0: horizon:~$ find foo find: ‘foo’: No such file or directory horizon:~$ echo $? 1 horizon:~$

Re: Reg.. find command not working as expected in Ubuntu...

On 2023-12-02 Mannem Anil kumar wrote: > Dear Concern, > As i was exploring Linux related commands, i > have executed the following command in terminal. Where that file is not > existed and find command not says that file

Reg.. find command not working as expected in Ubuntu...

Dear Concern, As i was exploring Linux related commands, i have executed the following command in terminal. Where that file is not existed and find command not says that file is not found. After checking the previous command execution

[bug #59988] Documentation for the find command omits -printf %{A, T, C}z

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #59988 (project findutils): I'm OK with an incomplete list (as long as it's documented as such). However, I would hope the date and find commands can coordinate their respective incompleteness. ___ Reply to this

[bug #59988] Documentation for the find command omits -printf %{A, T, C}z

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #59988 (project findutils): The doc says (emphasis mine): > 3.2.3 Time Formats > > Below is an *incomplete* list of formats for the directives '%A', '%C', > and '%T', which print the file's timestamps. *Please refer to the* > *documentation of 'strftime' for the full l

[bug #59988] Documentation for the find command omits -printf %{A, T, C}z

URL: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?59988> Summary: Documentation for the find command omits -printf %{A,T,C}z Project: findutils Submitted by: jrw Submitted on: Tue 02 Feb 2021 04:15:57 AM UTC Category: documen

Re: find command has a bug?

Please see what happened below: > Here is the kernel info: > Is there anything wrong with my operation? I am looking forward to > your feedback. https://www.gnu.org/software/findutils/manual/html_mono/find.html#Cleaning-Up | If your find command removes directories, you may find t

find command has a bug?

I think find has a bug that can be launched by combining several commands together, in that it chokes by generating an erroneous report when I use inode to delete a directory, although it does remove the corresponding directory correctly. Please see what happened below: Here is the kernel

[bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

Update of bug #33724 (project findutils): Status:None => Wont Fix Assigned to: jay => berny Open/Closed:Open => Closed

Re: [bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

Thanks, I installed that into Gnulib, along with the attached cleanup patch. >From f62317186649b13b32cf636087f6a57a3f3c3805 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Eggert Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 16:53:59 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] fts: cleanup after FTS_NOATIME removal MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/

Re: [bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

On 10/1/18 9:35 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > I could go either way. Coreutils has several utilities that do > traversal, and a 'du --noatime' that makes a best effort might be > interesting to someone. But, like you said, neither coreutils nor > findutils has actually incorporated use of FTS_NOATIME,

Re: [bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

On 9/29/18 7:01 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: Bernhard Voelker wrote: So regarding gnulib, there are 2 alternatives: a) rename FTS_NOATIME to FTS_NOATIME, and add a retry to open/openat in each place when that was using O_NOATIME and we got EPERM. I didn't quite get the point of the rename; those tw

Re: [bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

On 9/30/18 2:01 AM, Paul Eggert wrote: > Bernhard Voelker wrote: >> a) rename FTS_NOATIME to FTS_NOATIME, and add a retry to open/openat >> in each place when that was using O_NOATIME and we got EPERM. > > I didn't quite get the point of the rename; those two identifiers look > identical > to me

Re: [bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

Bernhard Voelker wrote: So regarding gnulib, there are 2 alternatives: a) rename FTS_NOATIME to FTS_NOATIME, and add a retry to open/openat in each place when that was using O_NOATIME and we got EPERM. I didn't quite get the point of the rename; those two identifiers look identical to me. T

Re: [bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

Re-reading the text I wrote, I see that some critical words were missing: > Reserving the option doesn't seem especially helpful, either I meant, reserving the option as being for use only by the root user (for whom one might imagine the EPERM issue would not arise) does not seem especially helpf

Re: [bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

On 9/29/18 9:30 AM, James Youngman wrote: > Having a "don't update atime" option that only works sometimes (when I > own the directory) seems problematic to me. > > If the user specifies the "keep access time unchanged" option and we > can't honour it (because there is at least one directory that

Re: [bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

Having a "don't update atime" option that only works sometimes (when I own the directory) seems problematic to me. If the user specifies the "keep access time unchanged" option and we can't honour it (because there is at least one directory that they don't own) what should we do? We can't simply

[bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #33724 (project findutils): [CC-ing gnulib, in the hope they see the attachment as well.] On Sun 01 Nov 2015 11:19:53 PM CET, James Youngman wrote: > It looks like the FTS_NOATIME flag does what's needed. Not quite: openat() returns with EPERM if: $ man openat | grep

[bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

Update of bug #33724 (project findutils): Assigned to:None => jay ___ Follow-up Comment #2: It looks like the FTS_NOATIME flag does what's needed. __

Re: Feature request for find command -- process "nodump" flag

> You might want to look at the thread "xattr and capability support" in > findutils-patc...@gnu.org: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/findutils-patches/2014-11/msg0.html > > Dale Thank you, that does look like what I'm looking for -- I should have checked that list first. I'll forward thi

Re: Feature request for find command -- process "nodump" flag

> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:36:53 -0600 > From: Derek Pressnall > > Since the find command is often used to generate a list of files to > include in a system backup, it would be useful if it included tests > for some filesystem-specific tests such as the "dump" exte

Feature request for find command -- process "nodump" flag

Since the find command is often used to generate a list of files to include in a system backup, it would be useful if it included tests for some filesystem-specific tests such as the "dump" extended attribute flag on the ext2 (or above) file system. Also processing any other extended

Re: Hi small improvement to find command.

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:48 AM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 01/29/2013 01:24 AM, Prashant Sharma wrote: > > [Please don't top-post on technical lists] > > > The need for this arose with following scenario. > > I have stream processing engine doing some random stuff and creating a > lot > > of files i

Re: Hi small improvement to find command.

On 01/29/2013 01:24 AM, Prashant Sharma wrote: [Please don't top-post on technical lists] > The need for this arose with following scenario. > I have stream processing engine doing some random stuff and creating a lot > of files in the process. And since I did not wrote it myself and people who >

Re: Hi small improvement to find command.

The need for this arose with following scenario. I have stream processing engine doing some random stuff and creating a lot of files in the process. And since I did not wrote it myself and people who wrote it do not have clearing up mechanism for the files that accumulate and tend to either fill In

Re: Hi small improvement to find command.

Added the list again. On 01/29/2013 08:28 AM, Prashant Sharma wrote: > On 01/29/2013 08:10 AM, Bernhard Voelker wrote: >> On 01/29/2013 07:02 AM, Prashant Sharma wrote: >>> I was curious about the communities interest in a small improvement to >>> mtime's precision from days to seconds, hours and

Re: Hi small improvement to find command.

On 01/29/2013 07:02 AM, Prashant Sharma wrote: > I was curious about the communities interest in a small improvement to > mtime's precision from days to seconds, hours and minutes. > > something like > > find . -type f -mtime +1m would give me files modified in last one minute. Thanks for the su

Hi small improvement to find command.

Hello folks! Greetings! I was curious about the communities interest in a small improvement to mtime's precision from days to seconds, hours and minutes. something like find . -type f -mtime +1m would give me files modified in last one minute. Thanks in advance -Prashant Sharma

Re: Metacharacters with the '-name' option in the find command

Thanks Andreas for explaining. For what it's worth, there's also a very similar explanation in the "NON-BUGS" section of the find manual page. James.

Re: Metacharacters with the '-name' option in the find command

Thank you very much. Fred.

Metacharacters with the '-name' option in the find command

Hello, I do not understand metacharacters with '-name' option in the find command. Example: $ls file* file file.html $find . -name file* find: paths must precede expression: file.html Usage: find [-H] [-L] [-P] [-Olevel] [-D help|tree|search|stat|rates|opt|exec] [path...] [expres

Re: How to find all the files that satisfy one set of conditions in directories that satisfies another set of conditions in one 'find' command?

Since any file must exist in some directory (if it exists at all), the first test can be simplified. Since we're launching a shell anyway, we can just do the rest of the job there: find . -name .export -exec sh -c 'for exportfile; for child in "$(dirname $exportfile)"/*; [[ -x "$child" ]] && ech

How to find all the files that satisfy one set of conditions in directories that satisfies another set of conditions in one 'find' command?

Hi, I want find all the files that satisfy one set of conditions in directories that satisfies another set of conditions in one 'find' command. As an example, I want to search for executables in directories that has a file named ".export". As of now, I use the follow comm

Re: [bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

I think that would also need a change to ftw(). That's in gnulib. On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > Follow-up Comment #1, bug #33724 (project findutils): > > POSIX requires this behavior.  However, Linux provides the O_NOATIME flag to > open() to work around this behavior - so

[bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #33724 (project findutils): POSIX requires this behavior. However, Linux provides the O_NOATIME flag to open() to work around this behavior - so the obvious conclusion is that find should support the option of requesting the use of the O_NOATIME flag. It can't be on by

[bug #33724] Find command is changing the access time of directory

URL: <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?33724> Summary: Find command is changing the access time of directory Project: findutils Submitted by: nbhadauria Submitted on: Thu 07 Jul 2011 07:41:04 AM GMT Category

[bug #22715] find command for NETPATHS in updatedb is inconsistent with that for SEARCHPATHS

Update of bug #22715 (project findutils): Status:None => Postponed ___ Follow-up Comment #1: updatedb would probably be best rewritten. I'm going to mark the updatedb-related bus as "P

Re: I have an improvement for the find command

On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Murphy, Thomas wrote: > Hi, >  I have compiled in a change to the find command at my local site.  I > needed to find files/directories with acl access to a particular group, > so I added in some -acl support Leslie (CC'ed) also wrote some pat

I have an improvement for the find command

Hi, I have compiled in a change to the find command at my local site. I needed to find files/directories with acl access to a particular group, so I added in some -acl support In the case of the file named "out" in this example: ny630-lxdesk20:tmurphy~/workspace2/getacl$ getfacl

[bug #22715] find command for NETPATHS in updatedb is inconsistent with that for SEARCHPATHS

URL: <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?22715> Summary: find command for NETPATHS in updatedb is inconsistent with that for SEARCHPATHS Project: findutils Submitted by: jay Submitted on: Monday 03/24/2008 at 18:30 Ca

Re: find command is not searching recursively on drives which are mounted from windows Server (NFS) machines

On 7/31/07, Dilip Jambhale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Problem resolved with noleaf option. Sorry for repeating myself but... > What's the > link count on the affected directories? Is that in agreement with > the actual number of subdirectories? Thanks, James. __

Re: find command is not searching recursively on drives which are mounted from windows Server (NFS) machines

On 7/31/07, Dilip Jambhale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi > > > > On Linux machines find command is not searching recursively on drives > which are mounted from windows Server (NFS) machines. > > On other unix flavors it's working. Read the node &quo

find command is not searching recursively on drives which are mounted from windows Server (NFS) machines

Hi On Linux machines find command is not searching recursively on drives which are mounted from windows Server (NFS) machines. On other unix flavors it's working. e.g. --> cd /versant/replicated/release/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] release]$ find . -name "some"

Re: extended find command

On 2/7/06, Witt, Arnoud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi All, I made a script extending the find command. It adds -mbefore -mafter tests to the find command. The -newerXY option was just added (in the CVS code for findutils-4.3.x). It implements pretty much this feature.

Re: Find Command

On 1/11/07, Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Try this instead. find /some/path -depth -type d -empty -print find /some/path -depth -type d -empty -exec rmdir {} \; Exactly. You can also use -delete: find /some/path -depth -type d -empty -delete -o -printf "Failed to delete %p\n" T

Re: Find Command

On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 22:05:17 +0900 aforce ma wrote: > When I try to use the command belows to delete empty > directories,there always comes error messages,however the empty > directory has been deleted already,Is this a Bug? or how can I do to > make the error do not come? > > find -type d -empty

Find Command

Hi, When I try to use the command belows to delete empty directories,there always comes error messages,however the empty directory has been deleted already,Is this a Bug? or how can I do to make the error do not come? find -type d -empty -exec rm -rf {} \; B.R Ma Bing __

Re: Find command explanation

-- - Original Message - From: James Youngman To: AOB Technologies Ltd. Cc: bug-findutils (gnu.org) Linux Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 3:47 PM Subject: Re: Find command explanation

Re: Find command explanation

On 7/2/06, AOB Technologies Ltd. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, When I type "find --help" at my RedHat Linux (model 2001 or so) I get all the syntax of the command with so many parameters. Nevertheless, it is very hard to understand the proper use for a desired kind of result and some examples

Find command explanation

Hi, When I type "find --help" at my RedHat Linux (model 2001 or so) I get all the syntax of the command with so many parameters. Nevertheless, it is very hard to understand the proper use for a desired kind of result and some examples or further break-down explanation about the parameters would

RE: extended find command

Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Youngman Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 22:51 To: Witt, Arnoud Cc: bug-findutils@gnu.org Subject: Re: extended find command It's an interesting concept, but find should not itself modify the files

Re: extended find command

It's an interesting concept, but find should not itself modify the filesystem unless the user has explicitly requested this (e.g. via -delete, -exec etc.). Your script also leaks the two temporary files. I recall that http://savannah.gnu.org/ also has a similar feature request for findutils. Per

extended find command

Hi All, I made a script extending the find command. It adds -mbefore -mafter tests to the find command. So findext -type f -mafter "2006-02-07 10:23" -mbefore "2006-02-07 12:34" -ls will show files modified after the specified time, but on or before the other