Re: confusing behaviour of the * wildcard when handling "dot" files and dirs.
- From: zakame@xxxxxxxxxx (Zak B. Elep)
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:03:01 +0800
Robert Heller <heller@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
The important thing to remember is this: the wildcards are expanded by
the *shell* *NOT* by the program you are using. If the program is going
to be traversing directories on its own, 'helping' it with wildcards often
confuses things. Once this is clear, all sorts of errors are avoided.
Agreed. Especially when dealing with directories with a huge file
count, a simple wildcard expansion won't cover it all. Better yet, use
find(1) in conjunction with xargs(1) (or using find's `-exec' flag) to
do selective/filtered directory processing.
--
I like the idea of 256 bits, though: 32 for the (Unicode) character leaves
room for 224 Bucky bits, which ought to be enough for anyone.
-- Roland Hutchinson, in alt.folklore.computers
.
- References:
- confusing behaviour of the * wildcard when handling "dot" files and dirs.
- From: Rahul
- Re: confusing behaviour of the * wildcard when handling "dot" files and dirs.
- From: Allen Kistler
- Re: confusing behaviour of the * wildcard when handling "dot" files and dirs.
- From: Rahul
- Re: confusing behaviour of the * wildcard when handling "dot" files and dirs.
- From: Robert Heller
- confusing behaviour of the * wildcard when handling "dot" files and dirs.
- Prev by Date: Re: confusing behaviour of the * wildcard when handling "dot" files and dirs.
- Next by Date: Re: confusing behaviour of the * wildcard when handling "dot" files and dirs.
- Previous by thread: Re: confusing behaviour of the * wildcard when handling "dot" files and dirs.
- Next by thread: Re: confusing behaviour of the * wildcard when handling "dot" files and dirs.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
