Actually not. I actually use xargs and I am not sure there is a difference
between the two commands. AFAIK xargs actually also runs rm for every single
file as the output gets piped to it.
Noah.
On Monday 28 January 2008 17:09, andrew colin wrote:
> xargs takes back to the problem of mv only supporting a certain number
> of arguments.
>
> On 1/28/08, Hari Kurup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Patrick Okui wrote:
> > > The last time I tried something similar (4 years ago) it works pretty
> > > well with one limitation. Bash (and other shells) won't take more than
> > > 256 (i think) arguments so you'd have to find . -type f -exec rm '{}'
> > > ';' or similar.
> > >
> > > That would work but I'm not sure how long it would actually take.
> >
> > I think piping it through xargs would be faster? This one calls 'rm' for
> > every single file.
> >
> > --
> > Hari
> > _______________________________________________
> > LUG mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug
> > %LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
> >
> > The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including
> > attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any
> > way. ---------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
LUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug
%LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including
attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way.
---------------------------------------
