On Mon Mar 9 23:30:22 EDT 2009, ano...@gmail.com wrote: > that seems a little awkward. erik's suggestion is what i > think i'd really like. rog's would be okay, although still > somewhatawkward, were i on plan 9; since i'm not, i think > i have russ's option. so with -x, say i had a tree: > > /dog > /cat > /fish/guppie > /fish/clown > /pig > > and i wanted /dog, /cat, and /fish/clown. would three > includes be sufficent there, or do i need it include /fish and > then exclude /fish/guppie, to get the heirarchy? > > i do wish more tools used proto. the format is so nice.
oh, you already know what i'm going to suggest, so just get to it! russ: i don't think in understand your motivating case. if you want to flatten /some/long/path/target to just target, why can't you just cd there? there must be some other part i haven't gotten yet. - erik
