From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14635 invoked by alias); 7 May 2012 14:15:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Users List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 17058 Received: (qmail 1578 invoked from network); 7 May 2012 14:15:00 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at closedmail.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) From: Bart Schaefer Message-id: <120507071434.ZM10459@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 07:14:34 -0700 In-reply-to: <20120507084141.GA8366@lohen.blott-online.com> Comments: In reply to Stephen Blott "zargs: unexpected, non-xargs behaviour" (May 7, 9:41am) References: <20120507084141.GA8366@lohen.blott-online.com> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-users@zsh.org Subject: Re: zargs: unexpected, non-xargs behaviour MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On May 7, 9:41am, Stephen Blott wrote: } } Am I missing something? In the comments in the zargs function file: # * POSIX -L and -n are mutually exclusive and effectively synonymous; # zargs accepts both and considers -n to be a limit on the total number # of arguments per command line, that is, including the initial-args. # Thus the following fails with "argument list too long": # zargs -n 3 -- echo Here are four words # The smallest limit implied by the combination of -L and -n is used.