PYTHON 3.4 LEFTOVERS

[Ned Batchelder]

On Saturday, November 16, 2013 2:46:40 PM UTC-5, YBM wrote:
> Le 16.11.2013 18:00, Nikos a écrit :
> > Στις 16/11/2013 6:46 μμ, ο/η YBM έγραψε:
> >> Le 16.11.2013 17:30, Ferrous Cranus a écrit :
> >>> Mark wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> If you have to deliberately post like this in an attempt to annoy
> >>>> people, would you please not do so using double spaced google crap as
> >>>> it's very annoying, thank you in anticipation.
> >>>
> >>> Sure thing Mark, here:
> >>>
> >>> root at secure [~]# find / -name python3.4 | rm -rf
> >>>
> >>> root at secure [~]# locate python3.4
> >>> /root/.local/lib/python3.4
> >>> /usr/local/include/python3.4m
> >>> /usr/local/lib/libpython3.4m.a
> >>> /usr/local/lib/python3.4
> >>> /usr/local/share/man/man1/python3.4.1
> >>>
> >>> still there!!!
> >>
> >> You are utterly stupid:
> >>
> >> 1st: rm does not read its standard input so doing
> >> whatever | rm -fr is useless
> >>
> >> 2st: even if it had worked (i.e. removed the files) they
> >> would still appear with locate, as locate is just reading
> >> a database build every day by updatedb (using find btw)
> >>
> >> What you want to do can be done this way :
> >>
> >> find / -name python3.4 -exec rm -rf {} \;
> >> updatedb
> >> locate python3.4
> >>
> >> but you'd better go to hell first.
> >
> > Even if you told me to go to hell i will overcome that and i need to
> > thank you because this indeed worked.
> >
> > Why is this find / -name python3.4 -exec rm -rf {} \;
> >
> > different from:
> >
> > find / -name python3.4 | rm -rf
> >
> > Doesn't any command take its input via STDIN or from a text file or from
> > another's command output?
> 
> No. Not all UNIX commands are filters. rm is NOT a filter.
> 
> > If the above was true then wouldn't linux displayed an error when i issued:
> >
> > find / -name python3.4 | rm -rf
> > locate python3.4 | rm -rf
> 
> Because you ask to suppress error output by adding -f
> 
> > The fact that it hasn't and it has indeed deleted many files proved that
> > rm as an other linux command can take input from another's command output.
> 
> No, it does not prove that, it prove that -f does what it is supposed
> to do, as you'd have done if you'd done "man rm" :
> 
> tv at roma:~$ echo a | rm
> rm: missing operand
> Try `rm --help' for more information.
> tv at roma:~$ echo a | rm -f
> bash: echo: write error: Broken pipe


YBM: please consider your actions.  First you tell Nikos not to be on this list, and then you answer his questions.  This is a confusing mixed message, and will only result in more off-topic questions and follow-ups.  If you want a discussion to stop, the best thing to do is to not continue it.

I know it is difficult to walk away from someone claiming to know something that they do not.  It is very tempting to get the last word and prove that they are wrong.  But it often just extends the nonsense.  Better is to just ignore it.  I haven't always followed this advice myself, but I am learning.

--Ned.