[lug] find command or similar

[The Matt]

On Tue, 2003-05-13 at 12:22, Tkil wrote:
<snip>
> I thought of using "locate" as well, as it really should be a lot
> faster than find -- it might not cover all the directories quite
> correctly, though; I never did investigate its security and privacy
> issues very thoroughly.

Just as a question, what do you mean by the last line?  I always thought
slocate (since vanilla locate doesn't seem to exist anymore) was pretty
secure. 

<snip>
> I'd consider using perl as the "print if it's longer than x" method,
> too:
<snip>

Nice.  Now I'll have to figure out a Ruby way (I'm starting to use Ruby
a lot...)
-- 
"And isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony, anyway?  I mean,
all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good
and crazy, ooh ooh ooh, the sky's the limit!" -- The Tick
  The Matt -- http://ucsub.colorado.edu/~thompsma/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/pipermail/lug/attachments/20030513/3ab4ee6e/attachment.pgp>