Hmmm, never noticed that.. nice trick

On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:13:10 -0700
"Grant Kelly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Very true, and a arguably more intuitive solution than using sed.
> 
> The man page for tail in Linux hardly mentions using '+'. It's not
> even shown in the SYNOPSIS; it's snuck into a descriptive paragraph
> after the list of options.
> 
> On Solaris, '+' is actualy shown in the first line of the SYNOPSIS.
> Much more visible.
> 
> Thanks for pointing this out (again). It will be useful to others in
> the future.
> 
> Grant
> 
> On 6/30/06, Jeff Shippen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >  heh, you guys are acting like you never got the e-mail i sent days ago
> > regarding the tail command.
> >
> >  tail +301 bigfile will start at line 301 and display till the end, you can
> > then use redirection to put it in a new file.  So you don't have to know the
> > total number of lines, just the number of lines in the beginning that you
> > want to get rid of, which you mentioned already was 300.
> >  Jeff
> >
> >
> >  Grant Kelly wrote:
> > I did play with the tail command, but as mentioned, you still have to
> >  know the total number of lines in the file. `wc -l` took about 5
> >  minutes to calculate this number, and then you've still got to run it
> >  through tail.
> >
> >  Also, I wanted to remove the lines rather than ignore them so that, if
> >  needed, I could reuse the file or pass it on to others without them
> >  having to go through the same problem I did.
> >  Furthermore, the CREATE TABLE commands were preceeded by something
> >  like IF EXISTS DROP table.  I had already created the tables and
> >  changed them slightly, so I didn't want them re-created.  sed was the
> >  quickest and simplest tool for the job in this case.
> >
> >  So much for a "quick question".... over 30 messages in this thread!
> >
> >  Grant
> >
> >
> >  On 6/30/06, James Washer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Jeezus...
> >
> >  YES... the tail command gives the last "xx" lines of the files.. but
> > without counting the lines of the 2+GB file, one has no idea how many lines
> > that is. Counting the lines of an arbitrarily large file, when there is no
> > need to do so, is far from efficient.
> >
> >  Further try "cat < head -3 /etc/passwd" and report back on the shell error
> > you receive. That's just not legal shell syntax.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RLUG mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RLUG mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
> 

_______________________________________________
RLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug

Reply via email to