Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 19:14:49 +0200 From: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg> To: arch@FreeBSD.org Cc: chris@calldei.com, Randell Jesup <rjesup@wgate.com> Subject: Re: add -I ignoremask option to du(1) Message-ID: <20010128191449.A513@ringworld.oblivion.bg> In-Reply-To: <ybur92lbtca.fsf@jesup.eng.tvol.net.jesup.eng.tvol.net>; from rjesup@wgate.com on Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 03:19:01PM -0500 References: <20001214034803.C575@ringworld.oblivion.bg> <20001230012354.B20546@holly.calldei.com> <20001230095122.A4285@ringworld.oblivion.bg> <20001230160755.E20546@holly.calldei.com> <ybur92lbtca.fsf@jesup.eng.tvol.net.jesup.eng.tvol.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
So, what's the consensus on that one? :) Or should somebody give
a roll call, and count votes? :)
G'luck,
Peter
--
I've heard that this sentence is a rumor.
On Tue, Jan 02, 2001 at 03:19:01PM -0500, Randell Jesup wrote:
> Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com> writes:
> >On Saturday, December 30, 2000, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> >> This doesn't 1. exclude subdirectories; 2. provide per-directory stats.
> >> In no way does it solve the problem I mentioned in the part you quoted -
> >> excluding CVS/ subdirs from du output on a source tree.
> >
> > Sorry. Try:
> >
> >find . -maxdepth 1 \! \( -path '*CVS*' \) | xargs du -skc
>
> Nope. First, this considers files to be the same as directories.
> Second, this only excludes CVS directories from the top level - deeper CVS
> directories are included.
>
> Suffice it to say this series of attempts indicates that find/etc is
> NOT a reasonable(*) way to implement this (reasonable) request.
>
> Add the argument to du(1).
>
> Randell
>
> (*): since no one here in what should be one of the most experienced group
> of BSD hackers has posted a workable "unix-style" method, I conclude
> that it's either not possible, or at least is so non-obvious as to be
> effectively non-existant to any but the most experienced user.
>
> That's the problem with the old-school Unix philosophy of no program doing
> more than one thing, and stringing them together - the "stringing them
> together" part often ends up being as complicated a task as programming a
> solution into the program itself - or even more complicated. That's ok
> (sort of) if everyone using it is a programmer, and doesn't mind
> reinventing the wheel every few days. It's not ok for 99% of users.
>
> Sure, shell's are programming languages - but I don't really want to write
> a program just to find out how much disk space I'm using, or to sort the
> output of ls (another old argument), etc.
>
> ps. yes, I am a shell-script hacker to a degree, and have written shells,
> and used shells in all sorts of evil ways - but I don't want to tell
> everyone else to try to do that.
>
> --
> Randell Jesup, Worldgate Communications, ex-Scala, ex-Amiga OS team ('88-94)
> rjesup@wgate.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010128191449.A513>