Simon Windows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >>>> I haven't looked at it at all yet, >>>> but wonder if you've considered using inotify? >>>> That seems like that mechanism would be much more appropriate, >>>> when tailing many files in an arbitrary hierarchy. > > I have looked at the inotify library as you suggested. I agree it would > be a useful tool to use in tail as it removes the need to poll files and > would make a recursive version much more efficient. I can also see there > has been some discussion of using inotify in coreutils for this purpose. > > I think that issue is orthogonal to the recursive option I am proposing. > > I'd like the current version of tail to handle directories and follow > them in a sensible fashion. None of the inotify programs solve this > problem unless you use them initiate a new tail process for each new file. > > If you're willing to consider a recursive option I will be more than > happy to develop it further to make it robust and help with testing.
As I said already, here, http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2008-11/msg00068.html look at iwatch. Perhaps you haven't seen that message, since your email server, ipmailmx.internode.on.net, is making the mistake of rejecting email from me based on a single, erroneous RBL (Trend Micro RBL+). _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
