Re: problem with bash

[wayne <wayne@reliant.immure.com>]

You do if you an argument list that is to large.  try using just
ls with 7000 files and see what happens. :-)

On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 10:58:53AM -0800, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
> Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> 
> > Well, if you really want something equivalent to 'ls *', you'd need to 
> > do something like
> >
> > find . -maxdepth 1 \( -name .\* -o -print \) | xargs ls
> >
> > The "-maxdepth 1" is to not descend recursively into directories, and 
> > the "-name .\*" is to avoid listing hidden files/directories (which 
> > would not be matched by the '*' glob). The "-type f" is actually 
> > wrong, as '*' will match directories as well.
> >
> > Also beware that ls may be an alias, and xargs will run the actual 
> > executable in the path...
> 
> Huh?!? Just type ls! You don't need anything else and certainly not 
> something as complicated as what you propose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
> Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
> Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
> FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

-- 
Slowly and surely the unix crept up on the Nintendo user ...
Wayne Willcox                          I will not eat green eggs and ham
wayne@reliant.immure.com                     I will not eat them Sam I Am!!
A wise person makes his own decisions, a weak one obeys public opinion.
                -- Chinese proverb

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/