Hi,
I have implemented -regex and -iregex options for find(1):
http://people.FreeBSD.org/~knu/misc/find_regex.diff
They are meant to be compatible with those of GNU's and NetBSD's:
-regex :
True if the whole path of the file matches using
basic regular expression. To
* Akinori MUSHA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010220 11:19] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have implemented -regex and -iregex options for find(1):
>
Sounds good, just make sure the regex engine matches the one that
the other find(1)'s use.
--
-Alfred Perlstein - [[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
"I have the
At Wed, 21 Feb 2001 08:42:19 +1300,
Craig Carey wrote:
> What about the -iname option?.
>
> I recently installed GNU 'find' just to get that -iname problem fixed.
>
> Can you do -iname too?.
Thanks for the info. It's added now.
I'm ashamed to say that I couldn't resist implementing -E option
Akinori MUSHA wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have implemented -regex and -iregex options for find(1):
>
> http://people.FreeBSD.org/~knu/misc/find_regex.diff
I'm not familiar with find sources, but it seems to me you execute
regcomp() for each file name to be compared? If so... change that! :-)
Regc
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> * Akinori MUSHA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010220 11:19] wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have implemented -regex and -iregex options for find(1):
> >
>
> Sounds good, just make sure the regex engine matches the one that
> the other find(1)'s use.
It won't. GNU find certainly uses
Akinori MUSHA wrote:
>
> > I would object if it is a new variant of regexp. I'd say it ought
> > be between egrep and perl, in its functionality.
...
>
> - Perl's regexp is known to be a unique variant that is different
> from the "basic regexp" nor the "extended regexp" ;P
For that matter,
At Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:35:09 +0900,
Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> I'm not familiar with find sources, but it seems to me you execute
> regcomp() for each file name to be compared? If so... change that! :-)
> Regcomp() does expensive setup so that regexec() can be run
> inexpensively many times over.
At Wed, 21 Feb 2001 14:12:51 +0900,
I wrote:
> At Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:35:09 +0900,
> Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> > I'm not familiar with find sources, but it seems to me you execute
> > regcomp() for each file name to be compared? If so... change that! :-)
> > Regcomp() does expensive setup so that
Can an -iname option be provided. Then the FreeBSD find would be
more like GNU find, and lines like this could be written:
find /msdos-disk -iname "*txt" | xargs -n 1 ls -l
I am doubtful that the -regexp needs to be inferior to the the
-egrep option. What software would break: it was said tha
Akinori MUSHA wrote:
>
> > > I'm not familiar with find sources, but it seems to me you execute
> > > regcomp() for each file name to be compared? If so... change that! :-)
> > > Regcomp() does expensive setup so that regexec() can be run
> > > inexpensively many times over.
> >
> > Indeed. I'll
At Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:53:26 +1300,
Craig Carey wrote:
> Can an -iname option be provided. Then the FreeBSD find would be
> more like GNU find, and lines like this could be written:
Yes, it's already implemented as I wrote in the previous mail.
> I am doubtful that the -regexp needs to be infe
At Wed, 21 Feb 2001 15:06:22 +0900,
Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
> > http://people.FreeBSD.org/~knu/misc/find_regex.diff
>
> You might have done it, but the version above is not it. :-)
Oh, would you please reload it?
When you see a function named do_c_regex(), that's it. :)
--
* Daniel C. Sobral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010220 19:39] wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >
> > * Akinori MUSHA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010220 11:19] wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have implemented -regex and -iregex options for find(1):
> > >
> >
> > Sounds good, just make sure the regex engine mat
13 matches
Mail list logo
