Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:21:07 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: find and xargs in /etc/security Message-ID: <E0vS4iR-0006oP-00@rover.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 24 Nov 1996 23:15:07 MST." <Pine.BSF.3.95.961124230736.12070O-100000@alive.ampr.ab.ca> References: <Pine.BSF.3.95.961124230736.12070O-100000@alive.ampr.ab.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <Pine.BSF.3.95.961124230736.12070O-100000@alive.ampr.ab.ca> Marc Slemko writes: : Yuck. There is the little matter of sort which messes things up. There : are ways around it by adding another command to the pipe, but that starts : to get ugly. Hmm. Unless we just do a find -ls, but that means we don't : get the full timestamps. That's why I suggested that you fix it, since it looked non-trivial when I looked at it. If you can come up with an easy way to deal with this, then please let me know. Taking a closer look, I don't think the sort is required at the place that it is right now, since I think it can be done after the xargs safely. : There is more wrong with /etc/security than that, so perhaps it is worth : looking at it a bit more deeply. OpenBSD and NetBSD have a far more : comprehensive /etc/security. Can you elaberate as to what makes them better? Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E0vS4iR-0006oP-00>