On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 03:26:26PM +, Always Learning wrote:
Its not intellectual enough and its too short and its also simple.
You left out incorrect.
John
--
Like its politicians and its wars, society has the teenagers it deserves.
--
Hello,
I try to find in a directory hicharchy the most recent time of file update.
I think, there could be a solution with find?
Thank you for help in advance
Best regards
Helmut Drodofsky
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
On 12/09/2011 02:41 PM, Helmut Drodofsky wrote:
Hello,
I try to find in a directory hicharchy the most recent time of file update.
I think, there could be a solution with find?
Try something like:
find . -type f -printf '%A@ %p\n' | sort -n | tail -1
Mogens
--
Mogens Kjaer, m...@lemo.dk
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 03:15:53PM +0100, Mogens Kjaer wrote:
Try something like:
find . -type f -printf '%A@ %p\n' | sort -n | tail -1
I believe you want %T@ instead of %A@ (modification time versus access
time). I would also suggest sort -nr to sort from most recent to least
recent.
thank you!
Helmut
Am 09.12.2011 15:15, schrieb Mogens Kjaer:
find . -type f -printf '%A@ %p\n' | sort -n | tail -1
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
On 12/9/2011 9:27 AM, John R. Dennison wrote:
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 03:15:53PM +0100, Mogens Kjaer wrote:
Try something like:
find . -type f -printf '%A@ %p\n' | sort -n | tail -1
I believe you want %T@ instead of %A@ (modification time versus access
time). I would also suggest sort
John R. Dennison wrote:
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 03:15:53PM +0100, Mogens Kjaer wrote:
Try something like:
find . -type f -printf '%A@ %p\n' | sort -n | tail -1
I believe you want %T@ instead of %A@ (modification time versus access
time). I would also suggest sort -nr to sort from most
On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 10:23 -0500, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
What's wrong with ls -laFrt?
Everything !
Its not intellectual enough and its too short and its also simple.
Paul.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
Always Learning wrote:
On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 10:23 -0500, m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
What's wrong with ls -laFrt?
Everything !
Its not intellectual enough and its too short and its also simple.
Ok, then ls -ZlaFrt | tail -1 | sort | tail -1
That better?
mark is the obfuscated
From: m.r...@5-cent.us m.r...@5-cent.us
John R. Dennison wrote:
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 03:15:53PM +0100, Mogens Kjaer wrote:
Try something like:
find . -type f -printf '%A@ %p\n' | sort -n | tail -1
I believe you want %T@ instead of %A@ (modification time versus access
time). I
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 10:09:27AM -0500, Windsor Dave L. (AdP/TEF7.1) wrote:
I like:
find . -type f -printf '%TY/%Tm/%Td %TH:%TM:%TS %p\n' | sort -n | tail -1
which shows the last access date/time in a human-readable format that also
sorts nicely (/MM/DD HH:MM:SS).
Note that some
11 matches
Mail list logo