network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | Austria | |
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 2 years |
| seen | Mar 8 at 7:45 | |
| stats | profile views | 10 |
|
Jan 10 |
comment |
Changing the UID of files in /proc excellent info about /proc. I didn't realize these were process IDs. So that means it is pointless to change the uid. |
|
Jan 10 |
asked | Changing the UID of files in /proc |
|
Aug 15 |
awarded | Excavator |
|
Jun 10 |
comment |
Remote for-loop over SSH look also at GNU Parallel's --sshlogin option. |
|
Jun 10 |
comment |
Use convert to grab a specific page from a PDF file? I was about to recommend pdftk as well. You will want to use it. |
|
Jun 10 |
awarded | Teacher |
|
Jun 10 |
answered | script to use the output of a command (ls) and use it in another command |
|
Jun 2 |
comment |
What is a better way to deal with server disconnects of sshfs mounts? any solution using maintained software? |
|
Jun 1 |
asked | What is a better way to deal with server disconnects of sshfs mounts? |
|
May 6 |
awarded | Supporter |
|
May 5 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
May 5 |
awarded | Scholar |
|
May 5 |
accepted | Why does “ls *” take so much longer than “ls”? |
|
May 5 |
comment |
Why does “ls *” take so much longer than “ls”? On the other hand, ls uses getdents64 and not (l)stat64 (as ls * is doing). getdents64 doesn't have a file name argument. On GPFL, ls -l uses another function called readlink, which may be faster than stat64. thanks a lot! |
|
May 5 |
comment |
Why does “ls *” take so much longer than “ls”? nice! You're right, I'm not seeing this difference on a local file system. Anyway, strace reveals that ls -l * is using lstat64 and getxattr, whereas ls * is just using stat64 and lstat64. |
|
May 5 |
revised |
What are your favorite command line features or tricks? added scr() function |
|
May 5 |
revised |
What are your favorite command line features or tricks? fixed '}' outside loop, which would result in copy and paste errors. Then some improvments to capitalization, such that I reach the 6 char changes limit |
|
May 5 |
comment |
Why does “ls *” take so much longer than “ls”? @camh: I tested a bit more (see my edits) and found that: ls < ls -l < ls -l * < ls * (I always ran it three times). With your explanation, I don't understand why ls -l * is faster than ls * |
|
May 5 |
revised |
Why does “ls *” take so much longer than “ls”? + ls -l * |
|
May 5 |
revised |
Why does “ls *” take so much longer than “ls”? added 106 characters in body |
