Message-Id: <200003071621.LAA14815@qnx.com>
Subject: Re: DJGPP innovations ?????
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 11:20:36 -0500 (EST)
From: "Alain Magloire" <alain AT qnx DOT com>
Cc: neldredge AT hmc DOT edu (Nate Eldredge)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000307104850.21917A-100000@is> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Mar 07, 2000 10:49:51 AM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL0b1]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> 
> On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, Alain Magloire wrote:
> 
> > > Running a program in background is easy, but finding files that are
> > > identical (efficiently) is not.
> > 
> > find $1 -xdev -type f -printf '%p %s\n' | \
> >  sort -nk1 | tee candidates | \
> >  uniq -f1 >uniquefiles && \
> >  comm -3 candidates uniquefiles >redundant && \
> >  join -1 2 -2 2 -o 2.1 1.1 redundant uniquefiles | xargs -n2 ln -f  
> 
> I'm probably missing something: the above doesn't seem to compare
> file's contents, only their names and sizes, right?  If so, this is
> not what I think was the intent: identical names and size does not
> mean the files' contents are identical.  You need `cmp' somewhere in
> that pipe.

You're probably right.  It was an untested script coming from a
highly flame debate inside QNX.  It is one of those things
that bring Un*x people together; editor wars, one liner scripting, etc ...

> 
> When I said ``efficiently'', I thought about efficient comparison of
> file contents that would avoid the quadratic behavior.

Ok.


-- 
au revoir, alain
----
Aussi haut que l'on soit assis, on n'est toujours assis que sur son cul !!!