Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 00:26:20 +0100 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: sobomax@FreeBSD.org Cc: brian@Awfulhak.org, kabaev@mail.ru, sheldonh@uunet.co.za, freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net, bsd@bsdhome.com, schweikh@schweikhardt.net, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, brian@Awfulhak.org Subject: Re: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:_cp_-d_dir_patch_for_review_(or_'xargs'=3F)?= Message-ID: <200104222326.f3MNQKK02955@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: Message from Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> of "Sun, 22 Apr 2001 15:47:43 %2B0300." <200104221247.PAA94845@ipcard.iptcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2001 13:16:31 +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
> > > On Sat, 21 Apr 2001 20:04:31 +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
> > > > > Sorry for butting in. Adding new non-portable functionality to solve the problem
> > > > > which could be adequitely taken care of using existing and well known
> > > > > techniquies is not appropriate, I completely agree with you on that.
> > > >
> > > > And I'm still waiting to see those well known techniques.
> > >
> > > Attached small script should solve this problem and doesn't require
> > > introducing incompatible option in the standard tool.
> > >
> > > For example:
> > >
> > > find /usr/src -type f | xargs larg cp targetdir
> > >
> > > For speed purposes it could be implemented in raw C.
> > >
> > > -Maxim
> > >
> > > #!/bin/sh
> > >
> > > if [ ${#} -le 2 ]; then
> > > echo "Usage: larg command lastarg arg1 [arg2 ...]"
> > > exit 0
> > ^
> > oops :-)
> > > fi
> > >
> > > COMMAND=${1}
> > > LASTARG=${2}
> > > shift 2
> > > exec ${COMMAND} "${@}" "${LASTARG}"
> >
> > Yes, I think this will work as long as your environment isn't
> > polluted by something like $ENV (any increase in the environment size
> > will effect xargs's calculation of how many arguments will fit on the
> > command line).
>
> I don't see why it matters. The only thing that matters here is number of
> args accepted by the shell. Anyway this is a 2-minute prototype... ;)
> As you can see, the problem in fact could be easily solved using "well
> known techniques".
>
> > Of course I still prefer the xargs fix - as you said above, it'd be
> > nicer in C :-)
>
> I still don't see why it couldn't be an separate tool (perhaps more
> general that my prototype).
I don't see that such a tool would be used without xargs, whereas
users of xargs often want/expect this sort of facility - or so I
believe.
> -Maxim
--
Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org> <brian@[uk.]FreeBSD.org>
<http://www.Awfulhak.org>; <brian@[uk.]OpenBSD.org>
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200104222326.f3MNQKK02955>