Between top-posting, bottom-posting, in-line responses, and reading too fast, I got lost.
As others have mentioned, if you simply want to run 'find' and by-pass any alias or functions, you can specify the full path (e.g. /usr/bin/find) or prefix the command with a backslash. If you want to know which 'find' is being used, then use 'type' or 'which', again, as others have mentioned. Both of those accept the '-a' option that gives more detail. Does a command exist that shows how nested aliases and functions are expanded? The closest I've gotten is to use 'set -x' followed by 'type -a'. For example: $ ( set -x ; la; ) + ls --color=tty -A $ type -a la la is aliased to `ls -A' $ type -a ls ls is aliased to `ls --color=tty' ls is /bin/ls Regards, - Robert On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 6:53 AM Johnathan Mantey <mante...@gmail.com> wrote: > What are your reasons for the recommendation? > The case against alias, as shown by this thread, shows one pain point to > compare against the benefit. > What is the issue with the '\' prefix, which I did not know existed. > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 4:49 PM Robert Citek <robert.ci...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Avoid aliases and functions with a backslash. For example: > > > > $ \find /etc/ | head > > > > Regards, > > - Robert > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 4:38 PM <tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > true - the alias usage was already answered by 'type find' > > > > > > However - if you reorder PATH variable than one could be picking up > > > find from ~/bin for example .... which whould also be reported by 'type > > > find' ... so you are right <== which is redundand here ... > > > > > > -T > > > > > > On Thu, 2018-10-04 at 15:38 -0700, wes wrote: > > > > "which" won't tell us whether there's an alias in the way or not. it > > > > will > > > > only tell us where an executable file matching the given name exists > > > > in the > > > > user's defined PATH. > > > > > > > > -wes > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 3:37 PM <tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > what does: which find > > > > > returns? > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2018-10-04 at 13:06 -0700, Rich Shepard wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 4 Oct 2018, Johnathan Mantey wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you tried > > > > > > > /usr/bin/find / -name foo > > > > > > > > > > > > Now that's interesting. Explicitly providing the path works. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm having other, more serious, issues with this new desktop > > > > > > and I > > > > > > expect > > > > > > that getting the others resolved will fix these, too. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > Rich > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > PLUG mailing list > > > > > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > > > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > PLUG mailing list > > > > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > PLUG mailing list > > > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > _______________________________________________ > > > PLUG mailing list > > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PLUG mailing list > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > _______________________________________________ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list PLUG@pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
