Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/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
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030312143322.046df310@pop3.cris.com>
X-Sender: rrschulz AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 14:40:01 -0800
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Randall R Schulz <rrschulz AT cris DOT com>
Subject: Re: ls : fails with a long list
In-Reply-To: <m3isuoi6v9.fsf@telia.com>
References: <000901c2e8d6$ee2bf9e0$c29ac250 AT leper>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Andrew,

At 13:59 2003-03-12, Andrew Markebo wrote:
>/ <fergus AT bonhard DOT uklinux DOT net> wrote:
>|>> Got two words for you: 'find' and 'xargs'... ;-)
>|
>| Thank you. I guess I phrased myself badly. I wasn't saying "How do I do
>| this?" (I think ls -AlR gives me pretty well what I was after). I was saying
>| "Once I could do this. Now I can't. Does anybody know if anything has
>| altered recently? and can anybody explain the phenomenon?" Anyway, it seems
>| from an earlier response to be something bash-related, so I imagine for the
>| moment I am stuck with it. Thanks again. Fergus
>
>Well it is related to the shell yes. Limitation of the length of the
>prompt the shell can handle. (I think ;-))

The prompt? Did I miss something?

There's a limit in all Unix / Linux / POSIX systems on the amount of 
argument and evironment data that can be passed through the exec(2). 
That limit varies from system to system, naturally. There might be a 
POSIX lower bound on that limit, but I'm too lazy to look that up at 
the moment (it doesn't show up in "ulimit -a").

So if you've got to deal with unbounded quantities of argument data, 
you've got to be prepared to deal with some kind of limit. Xargs is a 
generic solution when the arguments don't all need to be processed in a 
single invocation of the program to which those arguments are being 
passed. In other cases, it may be necessary to implement a scheme 
whereby the program can read argument strings from a file.


>More and more files coming into the subdir, or the contents are
>static?  Or hmm, could be a compilation switch to the compilation of
>bash, but wouldn't think so..
>
>             /Andy


Randall Schulz 


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/