ls -alR with wd?
in [Debian]
|
From: Tzafrir Cohen on 10 Jun 2010 18:10 On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:58:58PM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote: > Hi, > > I find `find' very inefficient when trying to find some files. I prefer > using `ls -alR | grep stuff' The problem is that the related output does > not give me the directory where `stuff' is found. How can I add some row > giving this? Thanks. Others already mentioned location. I'll just note that 'find' and 'ls -lR' should have comparable speeds. find's output should be nicer to parse. A single 'find' is normally enough to cache the relevant directories. E.g.: real 3m48.317s user 0m1.568s sys 0m7.948s tzafrir(a)sweetmorn:~$ time find /usr >/dev/null real 0m13.977s user 0m0.772s sys 0m1.532s tzafrir(a)sweetmorn:~$ time find /usr >/dev/null real 0m0.956s user 0m0.332s sys 0m0.616s tzafrir(a)sweetmorn:~$ time find /usr >/dev/null real 0m0.968s user 0m0.372s sys 0m0.576s Actually the second 'find' took way longer than I expected. $ free total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 2051620 1965084 86536 0 253852 284188 -/+ buffers/cache: 1427044 624576 Swap: 2000968 118404 1882564 -- Tzafrir Cohen | tzafrir(a)jabber.org | VIM is http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's tzafrir(a)cohens.org.il | | best tzafrir(a)debian.org | | friend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100610215821.GW16560(a)pear.tzafrir.org.il
From: Merciadri Luca on 10 Jun 2010 18:30 Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:58:58PM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote: > > > Others already mentioned location. I'll just note that 'find' and 'ls > -lR' should have comparable speeds. find's output should be nicer to > parse. > > A single 'find' is normally enough to cache the relevant directories. > Well, you first need to do _one_ find before for both to have the same speed. That's the problem. Locate seems to do what I want. > E.g.: > > real 3m48.317s > user 0m1.568s > sys 0m7.948s > tzafrir(a)sweetmorn:~$ time find /usr >/dev/null > > real 0m13.977s > user 0m0.772s > sys 0m1.532s > tzafrir(a)sweetmorn:~$ time find /usr >/dev/null > > real 0m0.956s > user 0m0.332s > sys 0m0.616s > tzafrir(a)sweetmorn:~$ time find /usr >/dev/null > > real 0m0.968s > user 0m0.372s > sys 0m0.576s > > Actually the second 'find' took way longer than I expected. > > $ free > total used free shared buffers cached > Mem: 2051620 1965084 86536 0 253852 284188 > -/+ buffers/cache: 1427044 624576 > Swap: 2000968 118404 1882564 > Thanks. -- Merciadri Luca See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/ I use PGP. If there is an incompatibility problem with your mail client, please contact me. There are only two tragedies in life: one is not getting what one wants, and the other is getting it. (Oscar Wilde)
From: Tzafrir Cohen on 10 Jun 2010 18:40 On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:18:58AM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote: > Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:58:58PM +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote: > > > > > > Others already mentioned location. I'll just note that 'find' and 'ls > > -lR' should have comparable speeds. find's output should be nicer to > > parse. > > > > A single 'find' is normally enough to cache the relevant directories. > > > Well, you first need to do _one_ find before for both to have the same > speed. That's the problem. Locate seems to do what I want. That is, unless you're not really sure the relevant sub-tree is up-to-date and run updatedb, which is equivalent to 'find /' (with proper excludes). -- Tzafrir Cohen | tzafrir(a)jabber.org | VIM is http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's tzafrir(a)cohens.org.il | | best tzafrir(a)debian.org | | friend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100610222849.GX16560(a)pear.tzafrir.org.il
From: Merciadri Luca on 10 Jun 2010 18:40 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Camaleón <noelamac(a)gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 22:58:58 +0200, Merciadri Luca wrote: > >> I find `find' very inefficient when trying to find some files. > > (...) > > I've got a "one-liner" saved: > > *** > find /directory/to/find/* -type f -exec grep -H 'text' {} \; > *** Nice! Thanks. (Once again, I never received this message by e-mail, even if I am a subscriber to the ML... still wondering why!) - -- Merciadri Luca See http://www.student.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~merciadri/ - -- If all else fails, try the obvious. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iEYEARECAAYFAkwRZXYACgkQM0LLzLt8MhxMIACghOWE4BMkhIIZ0gbtKkttGxdW aGgAoIWv+s2oScHpRZXX7EqApj/SQnTg =HZNJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87zkz234w9.fsf(a)merciadriluca-station.MERCIADRILUCA
From: Tom Furie on 10 Jun 2010 19:30 On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 09:46:12PM +0000, Camaleón wrote: > find /directory/to/find/* -type f -exec grep -H 'text' {} \; For that application, wouldn't you be better just using grep alone? i.e. grep -r 'text' /directory/to/find/ Cheers, Tom -- Raising pet electric eels is gaining a lot of current popularity.
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 Prev: Ntpdate Errors (previously posted, +) Next: ls -alR with wd? |