On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:06:12 -0600, "Theo de Raadt" wrote: > Todd C. Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The point of that example is to show how to safely use xargs. Since > > find now has its own built-in xargs support perhaps we should adapt > > the example to use that instead. > > Does it not matter that the xargs solution is maximally portable in > scripts, but the builtin isn't (widely implimented... but...)
I think these days the builtin xargs is more portable than the non-standard -print0 option. - todd
