> > The main one that I can see is that -exec spawns a new process for
> > each file, whereas xargs spawns one process for as many files as the
> > shell can handle (have you ever seen your shell tell you that the
> > command is too long?).
> > Any other drawbacks that people know of?
>> isn't that an "apples or oranges"?
>> I mean, you suggest that -exec is bad because it spawns a load of
> but xargs could potentially simply not work.
>> drawbacks on both sides.
Nope. xargs knows exactly how much your shell can handle and
passes as many args as possible to each run of the command.
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!