"ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

"ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[meino.cramer]

Hi,

is there a way to temporary convince 'ls' to act that way, that I can
use '| xargs -0' with it?

Thank ypu very much in advance for any help!

Best regards,
mcc

Re: "ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[Han Pingtian]

On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 06:54:11AM +0100, meino.cramer@gmx.de wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> is there a way to temporary convince 'ls' to act that way, that I can
> use '| xargs -0' with it?
> 
> Thank ypu very much in advance for any help!
> 
> Best regards,
> mcc
> 
You can use 'find' to list files which you want to list by 'ls' I think.

Something like this:

find . -maxdepth 1 -path './.*' -prune -o -printf "%P\0"
> 

Re: "ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[Moritz Bunkus]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 348 bytes --]

Hey,

another option is to let xargs separate on newlines instead of spaces with
its »--delimiter« option. That way you can still use ls:

[0 mosu@sweet-chili ~/tmp] ls | xargs -d '\n' ls -l
-rw-rw-r-- 1 mosu vj 0 25. Jan 12:50 Another file with spaces.txt
-rw-rw-r-- 1 mosu vj 0 25. Jan 12:50 Hello World.txt

Kind regards,
mosu
​

Re: "ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[nyuszika7h]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 71 bytes --]

Try this:

    \ls -b -1 | tr '\n' '\0' | tr '\\n' '\n'

--
nyuszika7h

Re: "ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[Atom Smasher]

On Sat, 25 Jan 2014, meino.cramer@gmx.de wrote:

> is there a way to temporary convince 'ls' to act that way, that I can 
> use '| xargs -0' with it?
================

here's how i do it...

ls /path | tr '\n' '\0'


-- 
         ...atom

  ________________________
  http://atom.smasher.org/
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

 	"Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the
 	 government can play."
 		-- Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister.

Re: "ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jan 25,  6:54am, meino.cramer@gmx.de wrote:
}
} is there a way to temporary convince 'ls' to act that way, that I can
} use '| xargs -0' with it?

My first reaction to this is to think you're probably asking the wrong
question.  If you need to use -print0 then you're anticipating that the
file names contain "dangerous" characters, but "ls" will already have
processed the file names, so now you're concerned with what the output
of "ls" looks like, which may have replaced some of those characters
with "?" ... sounds like a recipe for problems.

If using xargs -d $'\n' as Moritz suggested will not work, I suggest
you try using the -ls option of "find".  It can be combined with -print0
which may give you what you need.

    find foo ... -print0 -ls | xargs -0 ...

Re: "ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[Phil Pennock]

On 2014-01-25 at 06:54 +0100, meino.cramer@gmx.de wrote:
> is there a way to temporary convince 'ls' to act that way, that I can
> use '| xargs -0' with it?
> 
> Thank ypu very much in advance for any help!

I'd use the print builtin of zsh, so that there are no argv length
limitations, combined with zsh's very powerful glob operators.

  print -N **/*.c(mM-1) | xargs -0 ...

The `print -N` uses NUL characters between arguments, for compatibility
with `xargs -0`, and the example glob finds all .c files anywhere under
the current directory which were modified in the past month.

-Phil

Re: "ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[Mikael Magnusson]

On 27 January 2014 02:59, Phil Pennock
<zsh-workers+phil.pennock@spodhuis.org> wrote:
> On 2014-01-25 at 06:54 +0100, meino.cramer@gmx.de wrote:
>> is there a way to temporary convince 'ls' to act that way, that I can
>> use '| xargs -0' with it?
>>
>> Thank ypu very much in advance for any help!
>
> I'd use the print builtin of zsh, so that there are no argv length
> limitations, combined with zsh's very powerful glob operators.
>
>   print -N **/*.c(mM-1) | xargs -0 ...
>
> The `print -N` uses NUL characters between arguments, for compatibility
> with `xargs -0`, and the example glob finds all .c files anywhere under
> the current directory which were modified in the past month.
>
> -Phil

If you use the print builtin, make sure to also use -r to not do
backslash expansions.

-- 
Mikael Magnusson

Re: "ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jan 26,  8:59pm, Phil Pennock wrote:
}
} I'd use the print builtin of zsh, so that there are no argv length
} limitations, combined with zsh's very powerful glob operators.

Meino mentioned in private email that he has particular reasons for
using "ls" instead of "find".  If the options of "ls" are important
(rather than just the file names) and you don't need to worry too
much about CPU consumption:

  print -N -- **/*(.e:'reply=("$(ls -l "$REPLY")")':) | xargs -0 ...

That's going to run "ls -l" once for each plain file (.) below the
current directory, so it's a lot more process-intensive than a single
"ls -lR", and it may not sort in the order you expect, but it will
give you "ls" output with $'\0'-terminated lines.

Re: "ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[Kurtis Rader]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1069 bytes --]

I recognize that your example is artificial but it does not support
arbitrary "ls" options. It seems to me that ~meino is asking the wrong
question.


On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>wrote:

> On Jan 26,  8:59pm, Phil Pennock wrote:
> }
> } I'd use the print builtin of zsh, so that there are no argv length
> } limitations, combined with zsh's very powerful glob operators.
>
> Meino mentioned in private email that he has particular reasons for
> using "ls" instead of "find".  If the options of "ls" are important
> (rather than just the file names) and you don't need to worry too
> much about CPU consumption:
>
>   print -N -- **/*(.e:'reply=("$(ls -l "$REPLY")")':) | xargs -0 ...
>
> That's going to run "ls -l" once for each plain file (.) below the
> current directory, so it's a lot more process-intensive than a single
> "ls -lR", and it may not sort in the order you expect, but it will
> give you "ls" output with $'\0'-terminated lines.
>



-- 
Kurtis Rader
Caretaker of the exceptional canines Junior and Hank

Re: "ls" output like find ... -print0 anyhow ???

[Atom Smasher]

On Sun, 26 Jan 2014, Bart Schaefer wrote:

> Meino mentioned in private email that he has particular reasons for 
> using "ls" instead of "find".
=============

in that case, this won't work. but for the archives and anyone taking an 
interest in this thread, "zargs" would be worth looking into.


-- 
         ...atom

  ________________________
  http://atom.smasher.org/
  762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
  -------------------------------------------------

 	"Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression;
 	 this right includes freedom to hold opinions without
 	 interference and to seek, receive and impart information and
 	 ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
 		-- Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
 		United Nations