Re: coreutils ls

[Vitaly V. Ch]

On Dec 3, 2007 12:26 PM, Vitaly V. Ch <address@hidden> wrote:

>
>
> On Dec 3, 2007 12:06 PM, Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > Micah Cowan <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > > Bob Proulx wrote:
> > >> Vitaly V. Ch wrote:
> > >>> As I understand  ls require null-separated format of output stream
> > which
> > >>> will suitable for xargs.
> > >>>
> > >>> in this case I systematically use find instead of ls.
> > >>
> > >> Your message seems to be garbled and I, and perhaps others on the
> > >> mailing list too, cannot understand what you are trying to say.  If
> > >> you have a bug please describe the problem such that we can recreated
> > >> it.  If you are requesting a feature then try to state the feature
> > >> request in such a way that other people can understand it.  Thanks.
> > >
> > > It reads to me like a request for ls to produce null-separated output,
> > > so that
> > >
> > >  $ ls -0 .
> >
> > This comes close:
> >
> > $ printf "%s\0" *
>
>
> as far as I understand it's will not work if the total size of filenames
> in current directory is more then 32K bytes
>

bash-3.1# /usr/bin/printf "%s\0" *
bash: /usr/bin/printf: Argument list too long
bash-3.1#


>
>
> >
> >
> > Andreas.
> >
> > --
> > Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, address@hidden
> > SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
> > PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
> >
> > "And now for something completely different."
> >
>
>