I have to execute command in bash for all files in a folder with the extension ".prot'
The command is called "bezogener_Spannungsgradient" and it's called like that:
bezogener_Spannungsgradient filename.prot
Thanks!
find . -maxdepth 1 -name \*.prot -exec bezogener_Spannungsgradient {} \;
-maxdepth <depth> keeps find from recursing into subdirectories beyond the given depth.
-name <pattern> limits find to files matching the pattern. The escape is necessary to keep bash from expanding the find option into a list of matching files.
-exec <cmd> {} \; executes <cmd> on each found file (replacing {} with the filename). If the command is capable of processing a list of files, use + instead of \;.
I generally recommend becoming familiar with the lots of other options of find; it's one of the most underestimated tools out there. ;-)
You could do this:
for f in *.prot; do
bezogener_Spannungsgradient "$f"
done
Related
I'm trying to source a file that I can get from the output of find using these commands:
find ./ -iname activate.fish -exec source {} \;
and
find ./ -iname activate.fish -exec builtin source {} \;
But both these commands give the error of the form find: ‘source’: No such file or directory or find: ‘builtin’: No such file or directory. Seems like exec of find is not able to recognize fish's builtins ?
What I basically want to achieve is a single command that will search for Python's virtualenv activate scripts in the current directory and execute them.
So doing something like -exec fish -c 'source {}; \ would not help. I've tried it as well and it doesn't error out but does not make the changes either.
Any ideas what can be done for this ?
Thanks!
Perhaps you need:
for file in (find ./ -iname activate.fish)
source $file
end
# or
find ./ -iname activate.fish | while read file
source $file
end
Command substitution executes the command, splits on newlines, and returns that list.
As mentioned in comments, seems like -exec does not run in or affect the current shell environment. So find -exec is not gonna work for my use case.
Instead, this will work:
source (find ./ -iname activate.fish)
I have arraylist of files and I am trying to use rm with xargs to remove files like:
dups=["test.csv","man.csv","teams.csv"]
How can I pass the complete dups array to find and delete these files?
I want to make changes below to make it work
find ${dups[#]} -type f -print0 | xargs -0 rm
Your find command is wrong.
# XXX buggy: read below
find foo bar baz -type f -print0
means look in the paths foo, bar, and baz, and print any actual files within those. (If one of the paths is a directory, it will find all files within that directory. If one of the paths is a file in the current directory, it will certainly find it, but then what do you need find for?)
If these are files in the current directory, simply
rm -- "${dups[#]}"
(notice also how to properly quote the array expansion).
If you want to look in all subdirectories for files with these names, you will need something like
find . -type f \( -name "test.csv" -o -name "man.csv" -o -name "teams.csv" \) -delete
or perhaps
find . -type f -regextype egrep -regex '.*/(test\.csv|man\.csv|teams\.csv)' -delete
though the -regex features are somewhat platform-dependent (try find -E instead of find -regextype egrep on *BSD/MacOS to enable ERE regex support).
Notice also how find has a built-in predicate -delete so you don't need the external utility rm at all. (Though if you wanted to run a different utility, find -exec utility {} + is still more efficient than xargs. Some really old find implementations didn't have the + syntax for -exec but you seem to be on Linux where it is widely supported.)
Building this command line from an array is not entirely trivial; I have proposed a duplicate which has a solution to a similar problem. But of course, if you are building the command from Java, it should be easy to figure out how to do this on the Java side instead of passing in an array to Bash; and then, you don't need Bash at all (you can pass this to find directly, or at least use sh instead of bash because the command doesn't require any Bash features).
I'm not a Java person, but from Python this would look like
import subprocess
command = ["find", ".", "-type", "f"]
prefix = "("
for filename in dups:
command.extend([prefix, "-name", filename])
prefix = "-o"
command.extend([")", "-delete"])
subprocess.run(command, check=True, encoding="utf-8")
Notice how the backslashes and quotes are not necessary when there is no shell involved.
So, I have this simple script which converts videos in a folder into a format which the R4DS can play.
#!/bin/bash
scr='/home/user/dpgv4/dpgv4.py';mkdir -p 'DPG_DS'
find '../Exports' -name "*1080pnornmain.mp4" -exec python3 "$scr" {} \;
The problem is, some of the videos are invalid and won't play, and I've moved those videos to a different directory inside the Exports folder. What I want to do is check to make sure the files are in a folder called new before running the python script on them, preferably within the find command. The path should look something like this:
../Exports/(anything here)/new/*1080pnornmain.mp4
Please note that (anything here) text does not indicate a single directory, it could be something like foo/bar, foo/b/ar, f/o/o/b/a/r, etc.
You cannot use -name because the search is on the path now. My first solution was:
find ./Exports -path '**/new/*1080pnornmain.mp4' -exec python3 "$scr" {} \;
But, as #dan pointed out in the comments, it is wrong because it uses the globstar wildcard (**) unnecessarily:
This checks if /new/ is somewhere in the preceding path, it doesn't have to be a direct parent.
So, the star is not enough here. Another possibility, using find only, could be this one:
find ./Exports -regex '.*/new/[^\/]*1080pnornmain.mp4' -exec python3 "$scr" {} \;
This regex matches:
any number of nested folders before new with .*/new
any character (except / to leave out further subpaths) + your filename with [^\/]*1080pnornmain.mp4
Performances could degrade given that it uses regular expressions.
Generally, instead of using the -exec option of the find command, you should opt to passing each line of find output to xargs because of the more efficient thread spawning, like:
find ./Exports -regex '.*/new/[^\/]*1080pnornmain.mp4' | xargs -0 -I '{}' python3 "$scr" '{}'
This question already has answers here:
Argument list too long error for rm, cp, mv commands
(31 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
If I run the command mv folder2/*.* folder, I get "argument list too long" error.
I find some example of ls and rm, dealing with this error, using find folder2 -name "*.*". But I have trouble applying them to mv.
find folder2 -name '*.*' -exec mv {} folder \;
-exec runs any command, {} inserts the filename found, \; marks the end of the exec command.
The other find answers work, but are horribly slow for a large number of files, since they execute one command for each file. A much more efficient approach is either to use + at the end of find, or use xargs:
# Using find ... -exec +
find folder2 -name '*.*' -exec mv --target-directory=folder '{}' +
# Using xargs
find folder2 -name '*.*' | xargs mv --target-directory=folder
find folder2 -name '*.*' -exec mv \{\} /dest/directory/ \;
First, thanks to Karl's answer. I have only minor correction to this.
My scenario:
Millions of folders inside /source/directory, containing subfolders and files inside. Goal is to copy it keeping the same directory structure.
To do that I use such command:
find /source/directory -mindepth 1 -maxdepth 1 -name '*' -exec mv {} /target/directory \;
Here:
-mindepth 1 : makes sure you don't move root folder
-maxdepth 1 : makes sure you search only for first level children. So all it's content is going to be moved too, but you don't need to search for it.
Commands suggested in answers above made result directory structure flat - and it was not what I looked for, so decided to share my approach.
This one-liner command should work for you.
Yes, it is quite slow, but works even with millions of files.
for i in /folder1/*; do mv "$i" /folder2; done
It will move all the files from folder /folder1 to /folder2.
find doesn't work with really long lists of files, it will give you the same error "Argument list too long". Using a combination of ls, grep and xargs worked for me:
$ ls|grep RadF|xargs mv -t ../fd/
It did the trick moving about 50,000 files where mv and find alone failed.
OK, so simple enough.. I want to recursively search a directory for files with a specific extension - and then perform an action on those files.
# pwdENTER
/dir
# ls -R | grep .txt | xargs -I {} open {} ENTER
The file /dir/reallyinsubfolder.txt does not exist. ⬅ fails (bad)
Not output, but succeeds.. /dir/fileinthisfolder.txt ⬅ opens silently (good)
This does find ALL the files I am interested in… but only OPEN's those which happen to be "1-level" deep. In this case, the attempt to open /dir/reallyinsubfolder.txt fails, as reallyinsubfolder.txt is actually /dir/sub/reallyinsubfolder.txt.
I understand that grep is simply returning the matched filename… which then chokes (in this case), the open command, as it fails to reach down to the correct sub-directory to execute the file..
How do I get grep to return the full path of a match?
How about using the find command -
find /path/to/dir -type f -iname "*.txt" -exec action to perform {} \;
find . -name *.txt -exec open {};
(Decorate with backslashes of your needing)
I believe you're asking the wrong question; parsing ls(1) output in this fashion is far more trouble than it is worth.
What would work far more reliably:
find /dir -name '*.txt' -print0 | xargs -0 open
or
find /dir -name '*.txt' -exec open {} \;
find(1) does not mangle names nearly as much as ls(1) and makes executing programs on matched files far more reliable.