Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 00:20:55 +1100 From: Zero Sum <count@shalimar.net.au> To: Sebastiaan van Erk <sebster@sebster.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: argument list too long Message-ID: <00111700205500.61931@shalimar.net.au> In-Reply-To: <20001116122313.A69018@sebster.com> References: <20001116091607.A97857@sebster.com> <00111621362707.00522@shalimar.net.au> <20001116122313.A69018@sebster.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Thursday 16 November 2000 22:23, Sebastiaan van Erk wrote: > Zero Sum wrote: > > > Man 'xargs'. > > I know what xargs does. Do you want me to use xargs to run tar many times, > appending some files each time? That's a pretty lousy solution if you ask > me. > No, that was not what I was suggesting. But you are describing a common problem - not just with tar, so I gave a general solution so that it covered similar problems. I then went on to cover your problem specificaly. > > FWTW, the size of the command line buffer is a charatristic of the shell > > you use not the operating system. Don't be so quick to attack or you make > > a fool of yourself. > > eeyore(ttype:9:0):/usr/src/usr.bin> strings /usr/bin/tar | grep "Argument" > Argument list too long > > Oh really, then why is that string part of the tar binary. Why does it come > from /usr/src/lib/libc/gen/errlst.c? Why does it seem to be part of libc? > And why DIDN'T Linux have any problems (tried using both tcsh and bash > on both Linux and FreeBSD). > No, you miss my point. A construction like # program `find....` is going to encounter problems sooner or later because the shell performs the expansion not the program. Irrespective of how many parameters the program takes you are going to run out of command line space with any significant amount of filenames. It is simply a construction to be avoided in the same way that one avoids buffer overruns. For the same reason. It breaks. > I didn't attack any OS (other than perhaps DOS), I just stated my opinion > that I don't like having limits on argument lists. > > > Oh, and... The way to use tar and find is... > > > > find . -name "*.jsp" -depth | tar -czvf jsp.tgz > > > > Which won't tell you that your argument list is too long. > > You're right. It didn't. It also made an EMPTY tar file (except for a Because I stupidly left off the new GNU options --files-from - (use all the dashes) from the end. Sorry once upon a time it used to be the default. I don't look at man pages as often as I should anymore either. > header). I don't see anywhere in the tar manpage that you use it in this > way to get a file name list from stdin (and it doesn't work for me). > In fact, I read the man page several times because I couldn't figure > out how to do just that. And I still don't know. > Look, I was over the top because i've spent most of my day listening to FreeBSD vs RedHat arguments, when the question was already settled, just recriminations and swipes. So I over reacted severly, and I sincerely apologise. Please just forgive me for this. That, said, this is what I mean by a fundamental understanding of the Unix system. You missed (1) that the construction you were using was non-viable anyway. Any significant number of files would break the system, so it didn't matter which broke first, (2) that - is the symbol for stzndard in to a program where a filename is required. I'm sure you saw the --files-from option in the manpage. Even missing that (the - ), then find . -name "*.jsp" -depth > tmp1 tar -cvxf jsp.tgz --files-from tmp1 rm tmp1 should have been easy to see. > Thanks for the -depth option. That worked, even though it's not directly > obvious from the man page (yes, I did read it) that this is the way to do it. > > > So if you had used find and tar correctly you would not have had a problem > > which led to you making an inappropriate and irrelevant slur on an > > operating system of which you demonstrate a lack of fundamental > > understanding. > > Well, using your fundamental understanding didn't help me much either. > You have a point. I went off half cocked and did not explain as well as I should have. I trust I have explained more clearly now? > > I would heartily recommend looking reading Unix manual until you know what > > it's genral features are and how it works. > > > > Sorry, I've had a bad day. > > So you try to make yourself feel better by trying to spoil other people's > day? By insulting people who have legitimate questions? And by blurting > a lot of incorrect information? > Not quite, as I did, or at least attempt to answer your legitimate questions and the information was not incorrect, but incomplete. I still think that you made a 'snipe', but you are right, I should have ignored it. > > This mailing list is so people can HELP eachother. If you don't know how > to help people or can't do it in a friendly way, then do us all a favor > and don't answer email on this mailing list. > And help you I have, have I not? You have the exact answer you require to your problem, in fact two answers, spelled out. You have picked up several other items that you had not seen or did not know. I think that you have received good value, I'm sorry if you don't. As for being an ascerbic a***h**e about it, I regret that, and apologise for it. I can only say that if you had had the day I had, even a saint might have slipped. regretfully, Geoff -- count@shalimar.net.au Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use MessageID: 1TZQX2uZjdJJDZJsmAI3OU/pU7Jifzne iQA/AwUBOhPfRfh4xz7LU/evEQIikQCfS2UGg/Mcl3nSymU7i5nYnHk923gAoOvE +CAzLDVwaZRSXSYY+fEBsTdV =QhRJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00111700205500.61931>