delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: | No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_THREADED,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD |
X-Spam-Check-By: | sourceware.org |
Message-ID: | <4F97DA45.9050100@cs.umass.edu> |
Date: | Wed, 25 Apr 2012 07:04:37 -0400 |
From: | Eliot Moss <moss AT cs DOT umass DOT edu> |
Reply-To: | moss AT cs DOT umass DOT edu |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Subject: | Re: xargs: Why does order of command line switches matter? |
References: | <1335349788 DOT 2627 DOT 140661067092681 DOT 0CBF054A AT webmail DOT messagingengine DOT com> |
In-Reply-To: | <1335349788.2627.140661067092681.0CBF054A@webmail.messagingengine.com> |
X-IsSubscribed: | yes |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.com> |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
On 4/25/2012 6:29 AM, Ronald Fischer wrote: > Why do I get a different output in the following two invocations of > xargs? I had expected that the relative order of the command line > switches (-I, -L) would not matter: > > $ ls | xargs -I DIR -L 1 echo DIR > DIR wontprint.txt > DIR x.cmd > DIR x.pl > DIR x.sh > $ ls | xargs -L 1 -I DIR echo DIR > wontprint.txt > x.cmd > x.pl > x.sh > > > xargs (GNU findutils) 4.5.9 > Packaged by Cygwin (4.5.9-2) I agree that that is what happens, and that it does seem strange and buggy. I note, though, that -I *implies* -L 1, so the -L 1 is unnecessary. Perhaps the explicit mention of -L 1 "kills" the -I flag in xarg's command line processing. My guess is that this behavior is passed on from the upstream implementation and is not specific to cygwin, which means that the appeal for a change would probably need to be lodged elsewhere ... Eliot Moss -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |