Some of you commenters are pointing out, accurately, that `grep` can recursively search files on its own, without `find`. Of course it can! But remember, grepping was just the example I was using to illustrate `-exec`. Your options between `-exec` and `{} +` are practically limitless. Also, to those of you about to voice your displeasure with "needing the terminal to find lost files", your assignment is this word problem: "Susie has a VPS running a web server, and her server daemon has crashed due to a malformed configuration file. How can Susie identify and resolve the problem using only GUI tools and no terminal commands?"
I'm a retired UNIX/Linux System Administrator (30+ years) and I find your content refreshing and more to the point very useful! Yeah there are newer and perhaps simpler commands, but knowing the basics is still very important. People would ask me why learn vi when there is nano for example. Because from AIX to (name your Linux distro) etc, you'll always have vi :) Thanks again for your hard work and keep keep doing what you're doing!
@@occamraiser Not quite sure how to handle this, but are you aware of the fact vim has more features than nano does? Of course, if you haven't taken the time to learn vim then you won't be aware of that fact and if the pitiful nano is all you need then it's fine. But it is shite for handling text files of any non-trivial degree of length or complexity.
mc (Midnight Commander) has been around for 30 years. Why people are still using find, vi, nano and so on? I understand that there are some cases when there's no other choice (for example, to run certain command with all the found files), but they are very rare.
Holy Crap! 30+ years in this business and I *just* learned about '+' as an argument to find. How much of my life have I wasted to \; ?! Thanks Veronica! You're frickin' awesome!
A small correction on use of '+'. It does try to execute against all files at once, but this is subject to limits of command line length, it is not guaranteed to execute exactly one command. Also, worth noting that " find | xargs" is still useful in one scenario over -exec, and that is when exploiting parallelism or wanting to start the second phase of the command early. Assuming we are finding text logs to compress, and assume there may be hundreds and/or hundreds of GB of data: find . -type f -name '*.txt' -exec gzip {} + Will be slower than: find . -type f -name '*.txt' | xargs -n 5 -P `nproc` gzip Which will batch up your gzip commands, five files at a time, across however many cores you have. NB: nproc used for convenience and brevity, it may not exist on all unixes. This is reasonably niche and by default I reach for -exec every time over pipes. Other than those two minor nitpicks, this video is great 🙂
I prefer `find | xargs grep` because it executes grep one time across all the found files instead of executing a separate grep for each file as find -exec would do. find | xargs grep is often an order of magnitude faster when grepping a lot of files. EDIT: OK I wrote the above before I finished watching the video! And I see the the '+' form of exec does effectively the same thing. Wow I learned something new after using find daily for about 25 years. Thanks!
I want to mention GNU `parallel`, which is similar to `xargs` but distributes the load across all logical cores. The only bad thing is that it requires a Perl interpreter (and many other Perl dependencies)
the xarg approach is an antipattern: it's broken with filenames containing quotes or newlines. The cure is to use GNU's versions with the -print0 predicate to find, and the -0 (or --null) option to xarg. But this is not portable, and is very awkward. -exec (or even -execdir) with + is the correct approach
Started using Unix on a VAX 11/780 in the '80s before you were born!! But you're never too old to learn something new! Been using "\;" since then, and only just now learned about "+"! Thank you.
I've been in "THE INDUSTRY" for about 8 years and I notice that: - I still desperately need these easy basic tutorials about the most fundamental commands - I "FIND" (wink, wink) it very calming when they're explained to me like a patient 8th grade substitute teacher would Keep them coming!
Thank you! Because honestly, even as a somewhat experienced Linux user, learning these types of tools is hard, because you only use it when you needed by looking at the long documentation, then you never touch it again so you forget. Then when you needed it once more, it's the same tedious process. A fun video like this is perfect to master a tool like this!
I've been a professional Linux sysadmin since the 90s and use the find command all the damn time. This intro was perfect, and it taught me something I didn't know - ending the command with a plus instead of a semicolon. That's super useful in many contexts - thanks for that!
Your content is explained so perfectly that I cant help but break my "no notifications" preference for your videos. All those ive seen recently have been very high quality and explained in a way i understand, with the right level of depth and humor :) Thanks for doing what you are doing!
Thank you so much for the subscribe and the kind words! I also use a "no notifications" strategy... if you prefer RSS you can subscribe to my feed that way to avoid notification cruft in the first place. :) th-cam.com/users/feedsvideos.xml?channel_id=UCMiyV_Ib77XLpzHPQH_q0qQ
I love these videos -- if I ever have any kind of "virtual assistant" on a Linux machine, I want the voice to be Veronica Explains in 8th grade math teacher mode.
Wow, i actually think this is pretty cool that you are keep going through years! there is not so many youtubers that discuss linux and this nerd stuff, i believe in you!🥰😍
Linux has been my development platform for work for nearly a decade, but I still watch these videos because of how fun they are. And speaking of keeping up with the Commodore, I haven't written a BASIC program in years, I realised I miss it.
'cause the Commodore is keeping up with you! Loved how simple this was, and especially the explanation of the exec parameter termination and curly braces. I've seen so many "here's how you use find to ..." tutorials and never understood what was going on with those.
I need to try out a few examples tomorrow on my system, it's been awhile since I used this sequence of commands. I always used to use find then xargs then grep. Great timely video!
I love your videos. So information-dense! Great point about using fundamental built-in commands on systems that you can't install unnecessary packages on.
For example, below commands give the same result; find . -size +49M -size -56M find . -size 50M -o -size 55M -o \( -size +50M -size -55M \) you're welcome.. And thank you for your beautiful videos. I like them so much.
This was quite serendipitous two days after watching your video I needed to delete a bunch of svg’s and I would not have thought of find if not for your video
Love this!! This is such a handy command. Doesn’t work the same on my Mac but works just as expected on my Ubuntu system. Can’t wait to see more. Thanks.
As to the point @ around 1:11, I'm really glad you made a video about find because the simpler stuff such as fd doesn't require much explanation and the deep uses of find seem really really useful!
Excellent little tutorial and I look forward to the others. I've been using Linux a bit, on-and-off since 2005, and used find regularly, but consider myself a novice.
Nice video, and I’m happy to see people still using find. Be careful with quotes! The double quotes you used around *.txt will still allow the shell to expand the wildcard instead of passing it to find. You need to use single quotes, or put \ in front of the *. Your example passed into find a list of filenames, not the pattern *.txt
👍 for the “+” tip. If you need absolute paths use "`pwd`" instead of . And if you want one line per result use “find” a second time instead of “echo” find "`pwd`" -type f -exec find {} +
Our late cat loved my C64. He was always a keyboard walker, but this was his favourite. I'm keeping up with my Commodore now, as it's safe to plug it in again.
I've been using 'find' since the early '80s but I'm too aware how even the earliest commands "evolve" over time so I had a look. This is a nice overview of the basic command (like others, I didn't know about the '+' delimiter, that was worth the watch by itself. One explanation that would help is how the predicates of find act as a left-to-right execution queue, meaning you can list the conditions and each will be tested and if it succeeds, find will move on to the next test. This allows really useful sets of tests where you can do things like "files owned by fred larger than 1gb whose name begins with 'p'. A really nice video, thanks! (Keeping up with the Commodore)
Great video Yes, there are newer and faster utils but at work I have much older Linux servers without access to them So knowing how to do it the "old fashioned " way is important. Plus if your scripts use them it's more portable to any system. You can always check for the presence of FD, etc and use "classic" FIND as a backup
great video! thanks! i'm a novice/intermediate linux user, & while man is helpful, sometimes a video that explains a command can be waaaay better than text on a screen. so thanks again!
With 30+ years Unix experience I have to admit I never heard of + too. While quick, keep in mind there are limits for the size of a command line in many systems. Also, if you want to use the return value of -exec, + might not be handy. In situation like the one in in the video, I often use "grep * */* */*/* ... " as there are typically not more than 4 or 5 levels of directories. This does not need find, only the shell, that is one process less. If I get an error like "*/*/*/*/* not found" I know I added enough levels. I use this *ALL* the time. Also, I use fgrep when just looking for strings.. Still, great video and shows the young people the incredible power and ingenious design of the Unix OS.
"that is one process less" Piece of advice: drop this mentality. The drive to make pointless optimizations is toxic. It's a waste of your time and mental faculties. It's good to be aware of such things, but your time and efforts are better put to use on things that actually matter. I say this because I tend to fall for the allure of pointless optimizations myself.
@@majorgnu Yes, you are totally right. Don't worry, I'm not doing this, it was only kind of a joke/funny remark - like it is an additional advantage. For me, rather than having to fiddle with find, pipe, braces.. I just add * */* */*/* (that's typically enough)... its way simpler. And I mostly use fgrep since my searches often contain braces and stuff. I don't want to think what I need to escape or not, is it grep or egrep? I just type fgrep, less effort to think.At least for me, your mileage may vary, even depending on your keyboard layout. I make a lot of uses of find though, it is a great tool. But then - using many and more complex conditions etc. You always have to think if an optimization is worth the effort. For a single command, rarely ( having to type less might by a priority there), in a script or program which is run often, it may pay off over time.
As a linux user my self, i welcome more ways to do tasks in linux wether it is with a gui or cli, the same for browsers, i don't mind using chromium or opera, firefox for websites, TRULLY NICE WORK, CHEERS FROM TIJUANA MEXICO!
That's a pretty good summation of the find command, and an excellent description of the + terminator, that I hadn't heard of either. Nice work and a nice explanation. If it hasn't been said already, grep can do that search on its own, by (at least on Linux) using grep -nr "your search term" --include="*.txt"; which will limit grep's searching to only files ending in .txt and not anything else. You could perhaps add that to the wonderful grep episode you are looking to do.
Yup, grep can do that search on its own. But this is just one example of -exec: you can also use it to rename files, move things, change permissions, execute scripts, send things to awk, any number of features. I figured this was an easy first example for a beginner though.
@@VeronicaExplains The exec arg really is the magic sauce. Its so flexible, I've found myself using it to quickly execute rinky dink scripts in ways they weren't intended. The best part is I don't have to open up the script!
Very useful, thank you! Now I can list all files, bigger than say 100 MB in my Downloads folder, to easily spot the potential candidates for deletion, if running low on space: find Downloads/ -size +100M (with -ls at the end you get some additional details of the found files)
Hilariously I’ve just started to use find for more things since being forced onto wall, terminal is all I’ve got. Now I’ve got some more trick, thanks!
At work, we use git quite a lot, and manually making sure to run 'git pull' before I start working on a repo gets old pretty quick, so I wrote a quick find one liner that searches recursively for the .git folder, and executes 'git pull' if it finds it. This script is set as a cron job to run every morning just before I start work. Works great!
I feel like we should mention that you shouldn't try to get to fancy with -exec; It can often lead to unwanted results. ie don't use this to rename or manipulate files on your system, but this kind of thing is fine. Also if you have not covered xargs its one of my favs.
I love this series. I've been using find on various *nixes for years, and still I learned something new today (and yes, I am keeping up with the commodore)
i'm a know nothing who often struggles to find things. thank you. i'll be saving this and coming back to it for years. presuming i don't forget where i saved it.
Just a note for anyone interested: even with the + termination, find may still break the exec into multiple commands each receiving a concatenated subset of the found files up to the command line length limit of your *nix.
Are you keeping up with the Commodore?? I understand very little of this part of the Linux world.. But your videos are always a joy to watch.. Cheers Veronica!! You're as awesome as Linux 😀🤗
Did anyone notice the directory in which the script for this video was in, is spelled "Scirpts" good you didn 't look for the Scripts Directory. / :) . You're Awesome Veronica!
I deserves a place in my Linux playlist and you deserve a subscription. So far I kinda made it through using locate and scroll through results but that's not as efficient as what you told us in this video.
Sorry, Vanessa i will have to disagree with you. I am not going to leave any disparagin comment. This was a great tutorial! Thank you. PS And yes learning the basics is not only important it always becomes super-useful when more complex stuff is encountered later on. Great job!
Some of you commenters are pointing out, accurately, that `grep` can recursively search files on its own, without `find`. Of course it can! But remember, grepping was just the example I was using to illustrate `-exec`. Your options between `-exec` and `{} +` are practically limitless.
Also, to those of you about to voice your displeasure with "needing the terminal to find lost files", your assignment is this word problem: "Susie has a VPS running a web server, and her server daemon has crashed due to a malformed configuration file. How can Susie identify and resolve the problem using only GUI tools and no terminal commands?"
I'm a retired UNIX/Linux System Administrator (30+ years) and I find your content refreshing and more to the point very useful! Yeah there are newer and perhaps simpler commands, but knowing the basics is still very important. People would ask me why learn vi when there is nano for example. Because from AIX to (name your Linux distro) etc, you'll always have vi :) Thanks again for your hard work and keep keep doing what you're doing!
@@occamraiser Not quite sure how to handle this, but are you aware of the fact vim has more features than nano does? Of course, if you haven't taken the time to learn vim then you won't be aware of that fact and if the pitiful nano is all you need then it's fine. But it is shite for handling text files of any non-trivial degree of length or complexity.
Ha, I learned vi on AIX 3.2 in '97
mc (Midnight Commander) has been around for 30 years. Why people are still using find, vi, nano and so on? I understand that there are some cases when there's no other choice (for example, to run certain command with all the found files), but they are very rare.
@saszab mc is great for interactive use but extremely unhelpful for shell programming.
@@DavidSchmitt Sure, but these are vary rare cases. Vast majority of the Linux users never write scripts.
In my 30 years as a sysadmin, I've never heard of the +. I've always used the \; when using -exec. Thanks.
37 years for me. I can't wait to soup up my automation scripts with + lol
Only 28 years here, and I also just learned about + from Veronica. ✌️
Only 25 years here, and I always used \; too. I'll be trying the + now. Thanks, Veronica!
hah, wait until you hear about -execdir
I decided at one point to never skip an intro to a subject for reasons like this. Sometimes you just learn something new and that is awesome!
Keeping up with the Commodore would be a reality show I would actually watch
How is the C-64 running these days?
@@AdamMotlik It's BASICally okay. *laugh track*
Holy Crap! 30+ years in this business and I *just* learned about '+' as an argument to find.
How much of my life have I wasted to \; ?!
Thanks Veronica! You're frickin' awesome!
Same here, I always tended to use -print0 and pipe it to xargs -0. Thanks Veronica!
I like the part where veronica says "its explaining time" and explains all over the place
It's a good day when there's a new video from Veronica!
This was a real "+" for a topic. I use "find" nearly every day and did not know it has alternate endings \; Thanks.
A small correction on use of '+'. It does try to execute against all files at once, but this is subject to limits of command line length, it is not guaranteed to execute exactly one command.
Also, worth noting that " find | xargs" is still useful in one scenario over -exec, and that is when exploiting parallelism or wanting to start the second phase of the command early. Assuming we are finding text logs to compress, and assume there may be hundreds and/or hundreds of GB of data:
find . -type f -name '*.txt' -exec gzip {} +
Will be slower than:
find . -type f -name '*.txt' | xargs -n 5 -P `nproc` gzip
Which will batch up your gzip commands, five files at a time, across however many cores you have. NB: nproc used for convenience and brevity, it may not exist on all unixes.
This is reasonably niche and by default I reach for -exec every time over pipes.
Other than those two minor nitpicks, this video is great 🙂
I prefer `find | xargs grep` because it executes grep one time across all the found files instead of executing a separate grep for each file as find -exec would do. find | xargs grep is often an order of magnitude faster when grepping a lot of files.
EDIT: OK I wrote the above before I finished watching the video! And I see the the '+' form of exec does effectively the same thing. Wow I learned something new after using find daily for about 25 years. Thanks!
The + in my command executes once though.
@@VeronicaExplains I also learned this trick for the first time after using xargs for years. I gotta RTFM a bit more. 😁
I want to mention GNU `parallel`, which is similar to `xargs` but distributes the load across all logical cores. The only bad thing is that it requires a Perl interpreter (and many other Perl dependencies)
the xarg approach is an antipattern: it's broken with filenames containing quotes or newlines. The cure is to use GNU's versions with the -print0 predicate to find, and the -0 (or --null) option to xarg. But this is not portable, and is very awkward. -exec (or even -execdir) with + is the correct approach
I believe neither ‘+’ nor xargs necessarily put all the files as arguments to the command but parcel them up with respect to MAXARGS.
Started using Unix on a VAX 11/780 in the '80s before you were born!! But you're never too old to learn something new! Been using "\;" since then, and only just now learned about "+"! Thank you.
Your no nonsense explanations are great!
I've been in "THE INDUSTRY" for about 8 years and I notice that:
- I still desperately need these easy basic tutorials about the most fundamental commands
- I "FIND" (wink, wink) it very calming when they're explained to me like a patient 8th grade substitute teacher would
Keep them coming!
Thank you! Because honestly, even as a somewhat experienced Linux user, learning these types of tools is hard, because you only use it when you needed by looking at the long documentation, then you never touch it again so you forget. Then when you needed it once more, it's the same tedious process. A fun video like this is perfect to master a tool like this!
As someone who was "cool" in the mid-nineties, I appreciate the spacehog based puns.
I figured there was only a few who would get it.
I've been a professional Linux sysadmin since the 90s and use the find command all the damn time. This intro was perfect, and it taught me something I didn't know - ending the command with a plus instead of a semicolon. That's super useful in many contexts - thanks for that!
Been a Linux user for 20+ years. Love your videos and how you extend your knowledge to newer users. Keep it up.
The find command can be insanely powerful. I just learned the (+) versus the (;). Thank you for that. I had always used ; and didn't know about the +
Your content is explained so perfectly that I cant help but break my "no notifications" preference for your videos. All those ive seen recently have been very high quality and explained in a way i understand, with the right level of depth and humor :)
Thanks for doing what you are doing!
Thank you so much for the subscribe and the kind words! I also use a "no notifications" strategy... if you prefer RSS you can subscribe to my feed that way to avoid notification cruft in the first place. :) th-cam.com/users/feedsvideos.xml?channel_id=UCMiyV_Ib77XLpzHPQH_q0qQ
I love these videos -- if I ever have any kind of "virtual assistant" on a Linux machine, I want the voice to be Veronica Explains in 8th grade math teacher mode.
saw the video couple of days ago, ended up needing this today.
You saved me a loooooot of time and troubles. you're awesome
Wow, i actually think this is pretty cool that you are keep going through years! there is not so many youtubers that discuss linux and this nerd stuff, i believe in you!🥰😍
Linux has been my development platform for work for nearly a decade, but I still watch these videos because of how fun they are. And speaking of keeping up with the Commodore, I haven't written a BASIC program in years, I realised I miss it.
Ah, but would you admit that on a CV? Right after knowing how to configure sendmail, without the help of m4?
Thank you, Veronica! I’m finally taking my first steps into Linux and you’re helping me ‘find’ things along the way!
Best channel I've found in years, super useful and relevant.
Thank you for doing these Lil' Linux Lesson and concentrating on the commands that builtin rather than the newer that are not always in the repo's.
'cause the Commodore is keeping up with you! Loved how simple this was, and especially the explanation of the exec parameter termination and curly braces. I've seen so many "here's how you use find to ..." tutorials and never understood what was going on with those.
Awesome video Veronica, I loved this type of video with a specific linux topic!
Thank you for the support! More videos like this are on the way!
Been using find for 25 years and still learned something new (+). Thanks!
I need to try out a few examples tomorrow on my system, it's been awhile since I used this sequence of commands. I always used to use find then xargs then grep. Great timely video!
I really like the editing of this video!
I love your videos. So information-dense! Great point about using fundamental built-in commands on systems that you can't install unnecessary packages on.
Useful and to the point. No annoying sponsorship. 👍
For example, below commands give the same result;
find . -size +49M -size -56M
find . -size 50M -o -size 55M -o \( -size +50M -size -55M \)
you're welcome..
And thank you for your beautiful videos. I like them so much.
Are you keeping up with the Commodore?
Love your channel ! Very informative and entertaining !
Thank you! I have it on good authority that the Commodore is keeping up with us.
Thanks!
Thank you for the support!!
This was quite serendipitous two days after watching your video I needed to delete a bunch of svg’s and I would not have thought of find if not for your video
Your teaching skills are GOD tier. Thanks for all your hard work!
thanks for the different between the + and \; !
I know I had read that at one point, but forgot the difference a long while ago.
Love this!! This is such a handy command. Doesn’t work the same on my Mac but works just as expected on my Ubuntu system. Can’t wait to see more. Thanks.
As to the point @ around 1:11, I'm really glad you made a video about find because the simpler stuff such as fd doesn't require much explanation and the deep uses of find seem really really useful!
As of this moment, fd is unlikely to be in your baseline distro, container, or enterprise approved tools list. Find will be though!
Using “find” with -exec is so powerful! I’ve been using it since I first discovered it in a Unix manual in 1985. Whew!
Excellent little tutorial and I look forward to the others. I've been using Linux a bit, on-and-off since 2005, and used find regularly, but consider myself a novice.
Thanks!
Thank YOU so much for helping support the channel!
Veronica, your are the miracle!
Nice video, and I’m happy to see people still using find.
Be careful with quotes! The double quotes you used around *.txt will still allow the shell to expand the wildcard instead of passing it to find. You need to use single quotes, or put \ in front of the *.
Your example passed into find a list of filenames, not the pattern *.txt
Never knew Gilda Radner was so into Linux. And still alive for that matter.
Thanks for another entertaining video!
| column is the coolest thing i learned today.
It's called pipe.
@@saszab | this is pipe, that i know . i didn't know you could column like that.
I love your damn videos. I can't wait to see where this channel is at this time, next year. No pressure, though!
I never understood the find command... Until now! Thanks, Veronica!
👍 for the “+” tip.
If you need absolute paths use "`pwd`" instead of .
And if you want one line per result use “find” a second time instead of “echo”
find "`pwd`" -type f -exec find {} +
Hi Veronica. I'm amazed by your passion for computers! I really appreciate your videos. Cheers!
This is what I need to start my weekend, a quick explanation of how to use a command tool older than me....
And I'm 40 years old.
Great video, looking forward to the grep episode as well. Are you keeping up with the Commodore?
I was wondering the same thing!
Our late cat loved my C64. He was always a keyboard walker, but this was his favourite. I'm keeping up with my Commodore now, as it's safe to plug it in again.
I've been using 'find' since the early '80s but I'm too aware how even the earliest commands "evolve" over time so I had a look. This is a nice overview of the basic command (like others, I didn't know about the '+' delimiter, that was worth the watch by itself. One explanation that would help is how the predicates of find act as a left-to-right execution queue, meaning you can list the conditions and each will be tested and if it succeeds, find will move on to the next test. This allows really useful sets of tests where you can do things like "files owned by fred larger than 1gb whose name begins with 'p'. A really nice video, thanks! (Keeping up with the Commodore)
This video format is amazing!
Great video Yes, there are newer and faster utils but at work I have much older Linux servers without access to them So knowing how to do it the "old fashioned " way is important. Plus if your scripts use them it's more portable to any system. You can always check for the presence of FD, etc and use "classic" FIND as a backup
You had me at Commodore and reminding me that I'm awesome. This is my 3rd video so I think immma need to subscribe now.
yayy new linux video!!
edit: also, congrats on the 100k :)
SHE'S A LIGHT IN THE LINUX COMUNITY !
LIKE THE GUY FROM "THE LINUX EXPERIMENT".
I am keeping up with the Commodore after you helped me find it!
love it, keep 'em coming
great video! thanks! i'm a novice/intermediate linux user, & while man is helpful, sometimes a video that explains a command can be waaaay better than text on a screen. so thanks again!
oh, and, are you keeping up with the commodore?
Veronica, you are my spirit animal!
With 30+ years Unix experience I have to admit I never heard of + too. While quick, keep in mind there are limits for the size of a command line in many systems. Also, if you want to use the return value of -exec, + might not be handy. In situation like the one in in the video, I often use "grep * */* */*/* ... " as there are typically not more than 4 or 5 levels of directories. This does not need find, only the shell, that is one process less. If I get an error like "*/*/*/*/* not found" I know I added enough levels. I use this *ALL* the time. Also, I use fgrep when just looking for strings..
Still, great video and shows the young people the incredible power and ingenious design of the Unix OS.
"that is one process less"
Piece of advice: drop this mentality.
The drive to make pointless optimizations is toxic. It's a waste of your time and mental faculties.
It's good to be aware of such things, but your time and efforts are better put to use on things that actually matter.
I say this because I tend to fall for the allure of pointless optimizations myself.
@@majorgnu Yes, you are totally right. Don't worry, I'm not doing this, it was only kind of a joke/funny remark - like it is an additional advantage.
For me, rather than having to fiddle with find, pipe, braces.. I just add * */* */*/* (that's typically enough)... its way simpler. And I mostly use fgrep since my searches often contain braces and stuff. I don't want to think what I need to escape or not, is it grep or egrep? I just type fgrep, less effort to think.At least for me, your mileage may vary, even depending on your keyboard layout.
I make a lot of uses of find though, it is a great tool. But then - using many and more complex conditions etc.
You always have to think if an optimization is worth the effort. For a single command, rarely ( having to type less might by a priority there), in a script or program which is run often, it may pay off over time.
Recent Linux convert that"s keeping up with the commodore. Finding these videos super helpful for making my transition easier
As a linux user my self, i welcome more ways to do tasks in linux wether it is with a gui or cli, the same for browsers, i don't mind using chromium or opera, firefox for websites, TRULLY NICE WORK, CHEERS FROM TIJUANA MEXICO!
This is the kind of content I need being I have no idea how to do many basic Linux stuff
That's a pretty good summation of the find command, and an excellent description of the + terminator, that I hadn't heard of either. Nice work and a nice explanation.
If it hasn't been said already, grep can do that search on its own, by (at least on Linux) using grep -nr "your search term" --include="*.txt"; which will limit grep's searching to only files ending in .txt and not anything else. You could perhaps add that to the wonderful grep episode you are looking to do.
Yup, grep can do that search on its own. But this is just one example of -exec: you can also use it to rename files, move things, change permissions, execute scripts, send things to awk, any number of features. I figured this was an easy first example for a beginner though.
@@VeronicaExplains The exec arg really is the magic sauce. Its so flexible, I've found myself using it to quickly execute rinky dink scripts in ways they weren't intended. The best part is I don't have to open up the script!
Great explanation in 8 minutes especially exec +
Thanks! That's my goal with these, trying to keep them under 10 minutes and still thorough.
Very useful, thank you!
Now I can list all files, bigger than say 100 MB in my Downloads folder, to easily spot the potential candidates for deletion, if running low on space:
find Downloads/ -size +100M
(with -ls at the end you get some additional details of the found files)
I adore your content so much! I always learn so much with your videos, thanks a lot!
find is one of my most used commands. Great video.
Hilariously I’ve just started to use find for more things since being forced onto wall, terminal is all I’ve got. Now I’ve got some more trick, thanks!
Thanks for making this useful video, I didn't know the find command existed until now
At work, we use git quite a lot, and manually making sure to run 'git pull' before I start working on a repo gets old pretty quick, so I wrote a quick find one liner that searches recursively for the .git folder, and executes 'git pull' if it finds it. This script is set as a cron job to run every morning just before I start work. Works great!
I feel like we should mention that you shouldn't try to get to fancy with -exec; It can often lead to unwanted results. ie don't use this to rename or manipulate files on your system, but this kind of thing is fine. Also if you have not covered xargs its one of my favs.
Whenever I do potentially dangerous actions with scripting I always do a "dry run" with echo before the actual command name.
I find your explanations easy to follow. :)
Didn't know about the file size option. Very useful!
The find command is one of the commands that I always have to look up the instructions for when I need it :)
Brilliant! Thank you for the lesson.
going straight on my to watch list :)
I love this series. I've been using find on various *nixes for years, and still I learned something new today (and yes, I am keeping up with the commodore)
Love these little tidbits. Easier to commit then to memory when it isn't one of 10+ all presented at once.
Looking forward to grep
Great video as usual,thanks Veronica
i'm a know nothing who often struggles to find things. thank you. i'll be saving this and coming back to it for years. presuming i don't forget where i saved it.
Just a note for anyone interested: even with the + termination, find may still break the exec into multiple commands each receiving a concatenated subset of the found files up to the command line length limit of your *nix.
Are you keeping up with the Commodore?? I understand very little of this part of the Linux world.. But your videos are always a joy to watch.. Cheers Veronica!! You're as awesome as Linux 😀🤗
Did anyone notice the directory in which the script for this video was in, is spelled "Scirpts" good you didn 't look for the Scripts Directory. / :) . You're Awesome Veronica!
The moment I learnt how to use find, I felt like I had unlocked a superpower.
Those beautifal mechanical keyboards which Veronia uses. Love it!
Excelente video! Muy bien explicado. Gracias 😊
I deserves a place in my Linux playlist and you deserve a subscription.
So far I kinda made it through using locate and scroll through results but that's not as efficient as what you told us in this video.
Sorry, Vanessa i will have to disagree with you. I am not going to leave any disparagin comment. This was a great tutorial! Thank you.
PS And yes learning the basics is not only important it always becomes super-useful when more complex stuff is encountered later on.
Great job!
Great video! Do more useful command explainers like these please ❤
You Are my Linux Magician ❤
"Have you played Atari today!"
(No commodore because I'm a rebel. "
ZX Spectrum rulez!
Very useful video, thank you!