Taking from the last answer (by im3r3k) here: How do I recursively shred an entire directory tree?

I'm trying to get the find command to call a shell script as described.

So far I've tried:

find /home/shredtest/* -depth -exec /home/test.sh {}\;

where /home/shredtest is the directory whose contents I want to shred (but without removing /home/shredtest itself and where /home/test.sh is the script to run. I did chmod +x /home/test.sh.

The find command above returns:

find: -exec CMD must end by ';'

I've also tried:

find /home/shredtest/* -depth -exec /home/test.sh "{}"\;
find /home/shredtest/* -depth -exec /home/test.sh {}\;
find /home/shredtest/* -depth -exec sh /home/test.sh "{}"\;
find /home/shredtest/* -depth -exec sh \/home\/test.sh {}\;
find /home/shredtest/* -depth -exec sh \/home\/test.sh "{}"\;

all of which return the same error.


  1. Why is the -exec failing to see the semicolon? Obviously it's there and escaped so something else must be wrong. I just don't see it.
  2. Am I even going about this the right way or is there a better way to achieve this?

The ; has to be its own separate argument to find:

find /home/shredtest/ -depth -exec /home/test.sh "{}" \;

(note space between {} and \;). After -exec:

All following arguments to find are taken to be arguments to the command until an argument consisting of `;' is encountered.

(from man find). That is, the argument has to consist entirely of ; to stop the argument list.

You can also use `+' to pass many file arguments at once, which has to be its own argument too.

Note also that in find /home/shredtest/* the * is unnecessary: find will go through the directory contents itself, while * will be expanded by the shell (and occasionally may not lead to exactly the results you wanted).

  • Thank you Michael, will try those suggestions shortly. To address the * in find /home/shredtest/* I found, by running the find by itself, that without the trailing * the shredtest directory itself is included in the results. With the trailing * it's not. Is this not the right way or is there a better way to exclude shredtest from being shreded? – JoelAZ Jul 4 '14 at 4:54
  • You can use -mindepth 1 to process only contents and not the command-line arguments themselves. – Michael Homer Jul 4 '14 at 4:59
  • Excellent, thank you Michael. Something as silly as a space derailed me for at least 45 minutes <doh>. And mindepth seems to work a treat. Thank you! – JoelAZ Jul 4 '14 at 5:02

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.