Xref: utzoo comp.unix.wizards:15618 comp.unix.questions:12941
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!att!chinet!les
From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: unix question: files per directory
Message-ID: <8253@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 20 Apr 89 16:34:40 GMT
References: <24110@beta.lanl.gov> <4822@macom1.UUCP> <776@helios.toronto.edu>
Reply-To: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Followup-To: comp.unix.wizards
Distribution: na
Organization: Chinet - Public Access Unix
Lines: 20

In article <776@helios.toronto.edu> sysruth@helios.physics.utoronto.ca (Ruth Milner) writes:

[ rm * fails with large number of files..]

>Does anyone know:
>     1. why "rm" does it this way, and
>     2. are there other utilities similarly affected?

Actually the shell expands the * and can't pass the resulting list to
rm because there is a fixed limit to command line arguments.  All
programs would be affected in the same way, except those where you
quote the wildcard to prevent shell expansion (find -name '*' would
be the common case, and the -exec operator can be used to operate
on each file, or if you have xargs you can -print |xargs command).

However, if your version of unix doesn't automatically compress
directories (SysV doesn't) you should rm -r the whole directory
or the empty entries will continue to waste space.

Les Mikesell