Re: xargs -0 and -L

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Atte
Date: Thursday, February 4, 2010 - 3:48 am

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:32:43PM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
 
You seem to have misinterpreted the purpose of -print0 and -0. From
Linux find(1):

	-print0
	
	True; print the full file name on the standard output, followed
	by a null character (instead of the newline character that -print uses).
	This allows file names that contain newlines or other types of white
	space to be correctly interpreted by programs that process the find
	output. This option corresponds to the -0 option of xargs.
 
Using -0 for xargs simply means "Use \0 as otherwise \n or whitespace are
used". This also has nothing to do with POSIX compliancy, since using -0
in the first place breaks compliancy. 


I suggest OpenBSD rather change their -0 semantics to match those of
every other vendor which implement -0 in xargs. 
 
-- 
Atte Peltomdki
     atte.peltomaki@iki.fi <> http://kameli.org
"Your effort to remain what you are is what limits you"
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
xargs -0 and -L, Antti Harri, (Tue Feb 2, 10:31 am)
Re: xargs -0 and -L, Ingo Schwarze, (Tue Feb 2, 1:32 pm)
Re: xargs -0 and -L, Antti Harri, (Tue Feb 2, 11:54 pm)
Re: xargs -0 and -L, Atte , (Thu Feb 4, 3:48 am)
Re: xargs -0 and -L, Philip Guenther, (Thu Feb 4, 10:59 am)
Re: xargs -0 and -L, Ingo Schwarze, (Thu Feb 4, 6:49 pm)
Re: xargs -0 and -L, Atte , (Fri Feb 5, 3:14 am)
Re: xargs -0 and -L, Marc Espie, (Fri Feb 5, 4:46 am)