On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 15:36, Albert E. Whale, CISSP wrote:
Does anyone have any idea why this command will hang?
find /dev -type f
I would like to find/correct this issue.
TIA.
Not in my box. It works Ok.
--
__
/ \\ @ __ __@
On Tuesday 04 March 2003 05:01 pm, Adolfo Bello wrote:
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 15:36, Albert E. Whale, CISSP wrote:
Does anyone have any idea why this command will hang?
find /dev -type f
I would like to find/correct this issue.
TIA.
Not in my box. It works Ok.
works good here too,
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 14:19, et wrote:
On Tuesday 04 March 2003 05:01 pm, Adolfo Bello wrote:
On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 15:36, Albert E. Whale, CISSP wrote:
Does anyone have any idea why this command will hang?
find /dev -type f
I would like to find/correct this issue.
TIA.
You'll need to use grep as well as find
something like
find -name *.log | grep @ list.txt
but check out the grep man page as I always have to (short circuit in my head over the
exact syntax of grep sometimes ;o) )
This should give you every line that has an @ in it in all the log files and
On Tuesday 10 December 2002 4:23 pm, Brian York wrote:
I have some log files that have a bunch of crap in them. I need to extract
all of the email addresses in them and put them in a file. Does anyone
know how I might be able to do this?
Findemails.file
Thanks
Brian
If your logfile
On Wed, 2002-12-11 at 10:55, Robin Ballantine wrote:
On Tuesday 10 December 2002 4:23 pm, Brian York wrote:
I have some log files that have a bunch of crap in them. I need to extract
all of the email addresses in them and put them in a file. Does anyone
know how I might be able to do this?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian York wrote on Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 11:23:01AM -0500 :
I have some log files that have a bunch of crap in them. I need to extract
all of the email addresses in them and put them in a file. Does anyone know
how I might be able to do this?
hi Julio,
Not sure if find can do it on it's own... but in UNIX, no tool is on it's own! This
will work:
find . -type f -printf %s:\t%p\n | grep ^[456][0-9][0-9][0-9]:
good luck.
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001 09:03:44 -0400
Julio Rodriguez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi everyone...
Im trying to list
][0-9][0-9]:
- Original Message -
From: Alan W Jurgensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: [expert] Find
hi Julio,
Not sure if find can do it on it's own... but in UNIX, no tool is on
it's own! This will work
Hi Julio,
Using grep is a nice hack, and unix-ey in spirit, but in this case, find
already supports what you want directly
If you're looking for files between 4000 and 6000 bytes long in directory
dir, you'd use
find dir -size +4000c -and -size -6000c -print
('c' means the size is in
Not sure if find can do it on it's own... but in UNIX, no
tool is on it's own! This will work:
find . -type f -printf %s:\t%p\n | grep ^[456][0-9][0-9][0-9]:
That will match anything from 4000 to 6999.
But:
find . -type f -printf %s:\t%p\n | grep ^[45][0-9][0-9][0-9]:
will match
Dave, good point. use egrep with logical or | :
find . -type f -printf %s:\t%p\n | egrep ^[45][0-9][0-9][0-9]:|^6000:
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001 11:06:45 -0500
Dave Salovesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not sure if find can do it on it's own... but in UNIX, no
tool is on it's own! This will work:
Hi Julio,
Using grep is a nice hack, and unix-ey in spirit, but in this case, find
already supports what you want directly
If you're looking for files between 4000 and 6000 bytes long in directory
dir, you'd use
find dir -size +4000c -and -size -6000c -print
Actually, this
Pierre Fortin wrote:
...
I would think this indicates that find is buggy since the -o|-or|, does not
seem to work as documented... comments...?
...
find(1) is a first-class bitch of a program. It consistently trips me
up with it's arcane syntax and unexpected behavior.
In this case, you
Pierre Fortin wrote:
...
Yet:
$ find .test -iname test\* -iname .test\*
$ find .test -iname test\* -or -iname .test\* -or -print
give no output! Implies that '-print', while True, impacts the results of the
tests by causing alteration of the remaining parm relationships... I think this
Joe Smith wrote:
Pierre Fortin wrote:
...
I would think this indicates that find is buggy since the -o|-or|, does not
seem to work as documented... comments...?
...
find(1) is a first-class bitch of a program. It consistently trips me
up with it's arcane syntax and unexpected
This works here...
Remove all files in your home directory named a.out or *.o that have not
been accessed for a week:
find $HOME \( -name a.out -o -name '*.o' \) -atime +7 -exec rm {} \;
Note the '*.o'...
Steve Flynn
NOP Data Migration Ops Analyst
* 01603 687386
-Original
SoloCDM wrote:
How is it possible to force the find command to list all files with
read in the filename, regardless whether they start with a period
or not?
I already tried the following:
find /usr -iname .*read* -iname *read* -type f -print
--
Note: When you reply to this message,
SoloCDM wrote:
How is it possible to force the find command to list all files with
read in the filename, regardless whether they start with a period
or not?
I already tried the following:
find /usr -iname .*read* -iname *read* -type f -print
This is a question I sometimes ponder
Will,
Were you not aware that an rgrep RPM is included with Mandrake, and
should have been installed to provide an rgrep command? (see man
rgrep)
Will Merkens wrote:
RECURSIVE GREP
Here is a nasty One-Liner:
Did you wish you could grep through files recursively
down subdirectories:
Russ,
The slocate databse by default includes all the files from all the
partitions that were mounted the last time updatedb was run
You have to run (as root) updatedb to initialise this database and
whenever you want it to be made up to date.
It is set to run daily automatically at about 4
print" will only list core files to the screen.
Russ
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lane Lester
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2000 4:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [expert] find a file
Russ Johnson said:
Tom Berkley said:
If you do not perform an updatedb command periodically, the database for
the locate command will not be very thorough in its regurgitation. I
find the locate command works so fast that its worth the wait for the
updatedb command to run and then use the locate command
]
Subject: RE: [expert] find a file
Russ Johnson said:
find [root of search] [option] regex [option]
So, to find the file "httpd" do the following:
First, if you like, try "which httpd". It might be in your path. If that
doesn't do anything, then try "fi
patkoch wrote:
Part 1.1Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
Encoding: quoted-printable
First, the HTML doesn't work well on this list, and really
sometimes causes my replies to be deleted by my own mailer,
leaving you with just a header.
YOu would want to do the followig from
Just a note if in the future I seem to be unresponsive to HTML
posts and threads.
I figured a way to set up a filter in both my mailers to send
HTML to Dave Null
Civileme
Russ Johnson said:
find [root of search] [option] regex [option]
So, to find the file "httpd" do the following:
First, if you like, try "which httpd". It might be in your path. If that
doesn't do anything, then try "find / -name httpd -print". That find command
will search the
gave earlier. So the
command "find / -name core -print" will only list core files to the screen.
Russ
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lane Lester
Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2000 4:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [expert] f
On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 10:36:17PM +0100, patkoch wrote:
- Hi,
- I want to know how to find a file on one disk knowing the file name or a part of
file name.I didn't install Xwindows.Thank you for your help
"locate".
Try "man locate" or "info locate" for details.
--
-- C^2
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 07:04:22AM -0500, Lane Lester wrote:
- Russ Johnson said:
-
- find [root of search] [option] regex [option]
-
- So, to find the file "httpd" do the following:
-
- First, if you like, try "which httpd". It might be in your path. If that
- doesn't do anything,
Try these two out.
NO MORE LONG FIND COMMANDS
Tired of typing long "find" commands?...
You can use the following script to save keystrokes :
When run with one argument, searches the file all the way down the
working directory.
Well, this hardly requires an expert, but . . .
First, if you want to know how to do something, try "man -k".
It is one of the most powerful concepts in Unix.
(The others are |, , and /. [That is, pipes, fork, and
tree-structured directories.] Some of these are commonplace by now but
none
On Sun, Mar 26, 2000 at 08:34:43AM -0800, Russ Johnson wrote:
- The reason locate is so fast is that it has a database. Unfortunately, I
- don't believe that database (by default anyway) includes the whole hard
- drive. That's why I use find. Locate seemed to miss files that I know were
- on the
Russ Johnson said:
The reason locate is so fast is that it has a database. Unfortunately, I
don't believe that database (by default anyway) includes the whole hard
drive. That's why I use find. Locate seemed to miss files that I know were
on the hard drive.
Thanks for making me take a
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000, you wrote:
Hi,
I want to know how to find a file on one disk knowing the file name or a part of
file name.I didn't install Xwindows.Thank you for your help
Content-Type: text/html; name="unnamed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
find
[root of search] [option] regex [option]
So, to
find the file "httpd" do the following:
First,
if you like, try "which httpd". It might be in your path. If that doesn't do
anything, then try "find / -name httpd -print". That find command will search
the whole file system for that
36 matches
Mail list logo
