How can I get files using find command












2















How to use find command to get only files from the current directory (excluding subdirectories and its files) older than a day on AIX?






find aix







share|improve this question




















  • 3





    Please always mention your operating system! You already wasted your time on Ask Ubuntu because you didn't tell us you were using AIX and now you have reposted here (which is fine, AIX is welcome here) and you still didn't tell us you're using AIX! I had to edit it in. The basic tools like find vary considerably between the different implementations, so you always need to tell us what OS you are using. The shell you are using, ksh in your case, is irrelevant.

    – terdon♦
    15 hours ago
















2















How to use find command to get only files from the current directory (excluding subdirectories and its files) older than a day on AIX?






find aix







share|improve this question




















  • 3





    Please always mention your operating system! You already wasted your time on Ask Ubuntu because you didn't tell us you were using AIX and now you have reposted here (which is fine, AIX is welcome here) and you still didn't tell us you're using AIX! I had to edit it in. The basic tools like find vary considerably between the different implementations, so you always need to tell us what OS you are using. The shell you are using, ksh in your case, is irrelevant.

    – terdon♦
    15 hours ago














2












2








2








How to use find command to get only files from the current directory (excluding subdirectories and its files) older than a day on AIX?






find aix







share|improve this question
















How to use find command to get only files from the current directory (excluding subdirectories and its files) older than a day on AIX?






find aix




find aix






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 15 hours ago









terdon♦

132k32262441




132k32262441










asked 17 hours ago









AnonyAnony

1191




1191








  • 3





    Please always mention your operating system! You already wasted your time on Ask Ubuntu because you didn't tell us you were using AIX and now you have reposted here (which is fine, AIX is welcome here) and you still didn't tell us you're using AIX! I had to edit it in. The basic tools like find vary considerably between the different implementations, so you always need to tell us what OS you are using. The shell you are using, ksh in your case, is irrelevant.

    – terdon♦
    15 hours ago














  • 3





    Please always mention your operating system! You already wasted your time on Ask Ubuntu because you didn't tell us you were using AIX and now you have reposted here (which is fine, AIX is welcome here) and you still didn't tell us you're using AIX! I had to edit it in. The basic tools like find vary considerably between the different implementations, so you always need to tell us what OS you are using. The shell you are using, ksh in your case, is irrelevant.

    – terdon♦
    15 hours ago








3




3





Please always mention your operating system! You already wasted your time on Ask Ubuntu because you didn't tell us you were using AIX and now you have reposted here (which is fine, AIX is welcome here) and you still didn't tell us you're using AIX! I had to edit it in. The basic tools like find vary considerably between the different implementations, so you always need to tell us what OS you are using. The shell you are using, ksh in your case, is irrelevant.

– terdon♦
15 hours ago





Please always mention your operating system! You already wasted your time on Ask Ubuntu because you didn't tell us you were using AIX and now you have reposted here (which is fine, AIX is welcome here) and you still didn't tell us you're using AIX! I had to edit it in. The basic tools like find vary considerably between the different implementations, so you always need to tell us what OS you are using. The shell you are using, ksh in your case, is irrelevant.

– terdon♦
15 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















10














Assuming that the implementation of find on your Unix has the -maxdepth predicate (it's non-standard, but often available), the following find command would do that:



find . -maxdepth 1 -type f -mtime +1


This would print the names of the regular files (i.e. not directories, sockets, named pipes etc.) whose modification timestamp was more than 24 hours ago to the terminal.



If -maxdepth can't be used, then consider



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -print


This means:




  1. If the current thing find is looking at is a directory (-type d), and

  2. If its name is not . (! -name .), i.e. it's a subdirectory, then


  3. Prune that directory from the search path of find (-prune). This stops find from even considering anything beneath subdirectories.


Otherwise (-o):




  1. If the thing is a regular file (-type f), and

  2. If its modification timestamp is older than 24 hours (-mtime +1), then

  3. Print the name of the thing we've found (-print).


The parentheses are there for precedence between the two sets of tests. They need to be escaped as they would otherwise be handled by the shell (as defining a sub-shell).



By default, find outputs the pathnames of the found files. This means that you'll get filenames prepended by ./ from the above command. If you don't want that, then you will have to call the basename utility for each found filename.



You can do that like this:



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -exec basename {} ;


In comments you mention that you'd like to compress these files. For this, there is no need to call the basename utility. Just call gzip (or whatever compression utility you'd like to use) instead:



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -exec gzip {} +


Depending on whether you'd like to do something further with these files, you may look for similar question on this site, e.g. Why is looping over find's output bad practice?



Also related:




  • Understanding the -exec option of `find`






share|improve this answer





















  • 2





    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

    – terdon♦
    15 hours ago











  • Is there any way using xargs to implement the same?

    – Anony
    14 hours ago











  • @Anony Not in any way that would help I think. Also, this comment section was archived in a chat. Do consider using it. Also note that I've asked multiple times for the actual command that you are using. I can't debug anything without seeing it. Do not post further comments in this thread, but do feel welcome to use the chat.

    – Kusalananda
    14 hours ago













Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f506959%2fhow-can-i-get-files-using-find-command%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









10














Assuming that the implementation of find on your Unix has the -maxdepth predicate (it's non-standard, but often available), the following find command would do that:



find . -maxdepth 1 -type f -mtime +1


This would print the names of the regular files (i.e. not directories, sockets, named pipes etc.) whose modification timestamp was more than 24 hours ago to the terminal.



If -maxdepth can't be used, then consider



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -print


This means:




  1. If the current thing find is looking at is a directory (-type d), and

  2. If its name is not . (! -name .), i.e. it's a subdirectory, then


  3. Prune that directory from the search path of find (-prune). This stops find from even considering anything beneath subdirectories.


Otherwise (-o):




  1. If the thing is a regular file (-type f), and

  2. If its modification timestamp is older than 24 hours (-mtime +1), then

  3. Print the name of the thing we've found (-print).


The parentheses are there for precedence between the two sets of tests. They need to be escaped as they would otherwise be handled by the shell (as defining a sub-shell).



By default, find outputs the pathnames of the found files. This means that you'll get filenames prepended by ./ from the above command. If you don't want that, then you will have to call the basename utility for each found filename.



You can do that like this:



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -exec basename {} ;


In comments you mention that you'd like to compress these files. For this, there is no need to call the basename utility. Just call gzip (or whatever compression utility you'd like to use) instead:



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -exec gzip {} +


Depending on whether you'd like to do something further with these files, you may look for similar question on this site, e.g. Why is looping over find's output bad practice?



Also related:




  • Understanding the -exec option of `find`






share|improve this answer





















  • 2





    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

    – terdon♦
    15 hours ago











  • Is there any way using xargs to implement the same?

    – Anony
    14 hours ago











  • @Anony Not in any way that would help I think. Also, this comment section was archived in a chat. Do consider using it. Also note that I've asked multiple times for the actual command that you are using. I can't debug anything without seeing it. Do not post further comments in this thread, but do feel welcome to use the chat.

    – Kusalananda
    14 hours ago


















10














Assuming that the implementation of find on your Unix has the -maxdepth predicate (it's non-standard, but often available), the following find command would do that:



find . -maxdepth 1 -type f -mtime +1


This would print the names of the regular files (i.e. not directories, sockets, named pipes etc.) whose modification timestamp was more than 24 hours ago to the terminal.



If -maxdepth can't be used, then consider



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -print


This means:




  1. If the current thing find is looking at is a directory (-type d), and

  2. If its name is not . (! -name .), i.e. it's a subdirectory, then


  3. Prune that directory from the search path of find (-prune). This stops find from even considering anything beneath subdirectories.


Otherwise (-o):




  1. If the thing is a regular file (-type f), and

  2. If its modification timestamp is older than 24 hours (-mtime +1), then

  3. Print the name of the thing we've found (-print).


The parentheses are there for precedence between the two sets of tests. They need to be escaped as they would otherwise be handled by the shell (as defining a sub-shell).



By default, find outputs the pathnames of the found files. This means that you'll get filenames prepended by ./ from the above command. If you don't want that, then you will have to call the basename utility for each found filename.



You can do that like this:



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -exec basename {} ;


In comments you mention that you'd like to compress these files. For this, there is no need to call the basename utility. Just call gzip (or whatever compression utility you'd like to use) instead:



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -exec gzip {} +


Depending on whether you'd like to do something further with these files, you may look for similar question on this site, e.g. Why is looping over find's output bad practice?



Also related:




  • Understanding the -exec option of `find`






share|improve this answer





















  • 2





    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

    – terdon♦
    15 hours ago











  • Is there any way using xargs to implement the same?

    – Anony
    14 hours ago











  • @Anony Not in any way that would help I think. Also, this comment section was archived in a chat. Do consider using it. Also note that I've asked multiple times for the actual command that you are using. I can't debug anything without seeing it. Do not post further comments in this thread, but do feel welcome to use the chat.

    – Kusalananda
    14 hours ago
















10












10








10







Assuming that the implementation of find on your Unix has the -maxdepth predicate (it's non-standard, but often available), the following find command would do that:



find . -maxdepth 1 -type f -mtime +1


This would print the names of the regular files (i.e. not directories, sockets, named pipes etc.) whose modification timestamp was more than 24 hours ago to the terminal.



If -maxdepth can't be used, then consider



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -print


This means:




  1. If the current thing find is looking at is a directory (-type d), and

  2. If its name is not . (! -name .), i.e. it's a subdirectory, then


  3. Prune that directory from the search path of find (-prune). This stops find from even considering anything beneath subdirectories.


Otherwise (-o):




  1. If the thing is a regular file (-type f), and

  2. If its modification timestamp is older than 24 hours (-mtime +1), then

  3. Print the name of the thing we've found (-print).


The parentheses are there for precedence between the two sets of tests. They need to be escaped as they would otherwise be handled by the shell (as defining a sub-shell).



By default, find outputs the pathnames of the found files. This means that you'll get filenames prepended by ./ from the above command. If you don't want that, then you will have to call the basename utility for each found filename.



You can do that like this:



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -exec basename {} ;


In comments you mention that you'd like to compress these files. For this, there is no need to call the basename utility. Just call gzip (or whatever compression utility you'd like to use) instead:



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -exec gzip {} +


Depending on whether you'd like to do something further with these files, you may look for similar question on this site, e.g. Why is looping over find's output bad practice?



Also related:




  • Understanding the -exec option of `find`






share|improve this answer















Assuming that the implementation of find on your Unix has the -maxdepth predicate (it's non-standard, but often available), the following find command would do that:



find . -maxdepth 1 -type f -mtime +1


This would print the names of the regular files (i.e. not directories, sockets, named pipes etc.) whose modification timestamp was more than 24 hours ago to the terminal.



If -maxdepth can't be used, then consider



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -print


This means:




  1. If the current thing find is looking at is a directory (-type d), and

  2. If its name is not . (! -name .), i.e. it's a subdirectory, then


  3. Prune that directory from the search path of find (-prune). This stops find from even considering anything beneath subdirectories.


Otherwise (-o):




  1. If the thing is a regular file (-type f), and

  2. If its modification timestamp is older than 24 hours (-mtime +1), then

  3. Print the name of the thing we've found (-print).


The parentheses are there for precedence between the two sets of tests. They need to be escaped as they would otherwise be handled by the shell (as defining a sub-shell).



By default, find outputs the pathnames of the found files. This means that you'll get filenames prepended by ./ from the above command. If you don't want that, then you will have to call the basename utility for each found filename.



You can do that like this:



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -exec basename {} ;


In comments you mention that you'd like to compress these files. For this, there is no need to call the basename utility. Just call gzip (or whatever compression utility you'd like to use) instead:



find . ( -type d ! -name . -prune ) -o -type f -mtime +1 -exec gzip {} +


Depending on whether you'd like to do something further with these files, you may look for similar question on this site, e.g. Why is looping over find's output bad practice?



Also related:




  • Understanding the -exec option of `find`







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 15 hours ago

























answered 17 hours ago









KusalanandaKusalananda

136k17257425




136k17257425








  • 2





    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

    – terdon♦
    15 hours ago











  • Is there any way using xargs to implement the same?

    – Anony
    14 hours ago











  • @Anony Not in any way that would help I think. Also, this comment section was archived in a chat. Do consider using it. Also note that I've asked multiple times for the actual command that you are using. I can't debug anything without seeing it. Do not post further comments in this thread, but do feel welcome to use the chat.

    – Kusalananda
    14 hours ago
















  • 2





    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

    – terdon♦
    15 hours ago











  • Is there any way using xargs to implement the same?

    – Anony
    14 hours ago











  • @Anony Not in any way that would help I think. Also, this comment section was archived in a chat. Do consider using it. Also note that I've asked multiple times for the actual command that you are using. I can't debug anything without seeing it. Do not post further comments in this thread, but do feel welcome to use the chat.

    – Kusalananda
    14 hours ago










2




2





Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

– terdon♦
15 hours ago





Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

– terdon♦
15 hours ago













Is there any way using xargs to implement the same?

– Anony
14 hours ago





Is there any way using xargs to implement the same?

– Anony
14 hours ago













@Anony Not in any way that would help I think. Also, this comment section was archived in a chat. Do consider using it. Also note that I've asked multiple times for the actual command that you are using. I can't debug anything without seeing it. Do not post further comments in this thread, but do feel welcome to use the chat.

– Kusalananda
14 hours ago







@Anony Not in any way that would help I think. Also, this comment section was archived in a chat. Do consider using it. Also note that I've asked multiple times for the actual command that you are using. I can't debug anything without seeing it. Do not post further comments in this thread, but do feel welcome to use the chat.

– Kusalananda
14 hours ago




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f506959%2fhow-can-i-get-files-using-find-command%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

How did Captain America manage to do this?

Image
2 How does Captain America lift Thor's hammer? In Avengers: Age of Ultron , he is not worthy but how he is worthy in this film. plot-explanation marvel-cinematic-universe avengers-age-of-ultron avengers-endgame share | improve this question edited 19 mins ago A J ♦ 42.7k 16 229 246 asked 39 mins ago Andi AR Andi AR 325 1 4 14
Read more

迪纳利

Image
迪纳利峰 位于迪纳利国家公园和保留区的迪纳利峰（旧名麦金利峰） 最高点 海拔 20,237英尺（6,168米）   NGVD 29 . [1] [2] 相對高度 20,073英尺（6,118米） 列表 各洲最高峰列表 特独立山峰 各国最高点列表 美国最高点  排名第一 [3] 坐标 63°04′10″N 151°00′27″W  /  63.06944°N 151.00750°W  / 63.06944; -151.00750  ( Mount McKinley ) 坐标： 63°04′10″N 151°00′27″W  /  63.06944°N 151.00750°W  / 63.06944; -151.00750  ( Mount McKinley )   地理 位置   美國阿拉斯加州迪纳利自治市镇 迪纳利国家公园和保留区 山脈 阿拉斯加山脉 攀山 首次登頂 （ 英语 ： First ascent ） 1913年6月7日 哈德逊·史塔克 哈里·卡斯坦斯 沃尔特·哈珀 罗伯特·塔特姆 最簡路線 西坡路线（攀登冰川/雪） 迪纳利 （北阿萨巴斯卡语支、 英语： Denali ， / d ᵻ ˈ n ɑː l i / ，直译“高山”），1917年至2015年官方名称为 麦金利山 （另译作 麦金利峰 ， 英语： Mount McKinley ），位于阿拉斯加州东南部、阿拉斯加山脉中段，海拔6194米，是北美洲最高峰，也是美国的最高峰。它的俄语名称是 Большая Гора ， 罗马化：Bolshaya Gora ，意思是“大山”。 迪纳利山地区拥有变幻莫测的高山风、典型的北极植被以及野生动植物。这里大部分地区终年积雪，山间经常浓雾不断，雾气在皑皑白雪中缭绕弥漫时，几百米之外的景物便不可见。夏季，迪纳利山的青青山坡上鲜花盛开，紫色的杜鹃和精巧的铃状石南花随处可见。迪纳利山还是世界登山爱好者的汇集之地。每年5月到7月有数百人登山，只有一半不到的人能登顶成功。一次登山约花3个星期。 2015年8月31日，美國政府宣佈將山名由“麦金利山”改回原名“迪纳利山”。美國內政部發表聲
Read more

南乌拉尔铁路局

Image
南乌拉尔铁路局 Южно-Уральская железная дорога 成立 1934年1月4日 国家   蘇聯（1934年—1991年）   俄羅斯（1991年—） 总部 车里雅宾斯克 隶属 俄罗斯铁路股份公司 路局代码 80 铁路里程 4,934.9公里 奖项 网址 http://yuzd.rzd.ru/ 查 论 编 南乌拉尔铁路局 （俄语： Южно-Уральская железная дорога ， 羅馬化： Yuzhno-Uralskaya zheleznaya doroga ，简称 ЮУЖД ）是俄罗斯铁路股份公司属下的铁路管理局之一，总部位于车里雅宾斯克，负责管辖俄罗斯联邦乌拉尔南部地区的铁路系统，范围包括奥伦堡州、车里雅宾斯克州、库尔干州的大部分铁路，以及萨马拉州、斯维尔德洛夫斯克州、巴什科尔托斯坦共和国的少部分铁路，并有部分铁路延伸至或穿过哈萨克斯坦境内。南乌拉尔铁路局的营业里程为4,934.9公里，与伏尔加铁路局、古比雪夫铁路局、斯维尔德洛夫斯克铁路局、西西伯利亚铁路局相邻，并与南方的哈萨克斯坦铁路连接。 外部链接 （俄文） Южно-Уральская железная дорога — филиал ОАО РЖД （俄文） 南乌拉尔铁路局管辖路线图（一） （俄文） 南乌拉尔铁路局管辖路线图（二） 查 论 编 俄罗斯铁路（集团）股份公司 十月铁路局 · 莫斯科铁路局 · 北高加索铁路局 · 高尔基铁路局 · 古比雪夫铁路局 · 北方铁路局 · 伏尔加铁路局 · 东南铁路局 · 斯维尔德洛夫斯克铁路局 · 南乌拉尔铁路局 · 西西伯利亚铁路局 · 克拉斯诺亚尔斯克铁路局 · 东西伯利亚铁路局 · 后贝加尔铁路局 · 远东铁路局 · 加里宁格勒铁路局 This page is only for reference, If you need detailed information, please check here
Read more