From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <2ad7a1080f7e16b3cb469f19269133bf@csplan9.rit.edu> To: 9fans@9fans.net Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 23:53:28 -0400 From: john@csplan9.rit.edu In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] vac flattens trees? Topicbox-Message-UUID: b82bff58-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Erik Quanstrom wrote: > On Mon Mar 9 23:30:22 EDT 2009, anothy@gmail.com wrote: >> that seems a little awkward. erik's suggestion is what i >> think i'd really like. rog's would be okay, although still >> somewhatawkward, were i on plan 9; since i'm not, i think >> i have russ's option. so with -x, say i had a tree: >> >> /dog >> /cat >> /fish/guppie >> /fish/clown >> /pig >> >> and i wanted /dog, /cat, and /fish/clown. would three >> includes be sufficent there, or do i need it include /fish and >> then exclude /fish/guppie, to get the heirarchy? >> >> i do wish more tools used proto. the format is so nice. > > oh, you already know what i'm going to suggest, so > just get to it! > kenfs? ;) John