From: Nikolaus R. <Nik...@ra...> - 2011-10-07 17:04:33
|
John Muir <john-eXjPKP/gKh...@pu...> writes: > On 2011.10.07, at 13:00 , Miklos Szeredi wrote: > >> Han-Wen Nienhuys <han...@pu...> >> writes: >>> >>> Ahhh! Thanks. Do we need to present consisten Nlink numbers, or is >>> filling Nlink=1 everywhere good enough? >> >> You mean for directories? For directories nlink=1 should work fine, >> there's no need to calculate from the number of subdirectories. >> > > By default, the find command likes to have nlinks > 2 when there are > sub-directories or it doesn't look for/through sub-directories. You > can use the -noleaf option to have find ignore the nlink value for > directories. This bug has luckily been fixed in recent find versions, --noleaf is no longer required. Best, -Nikolaus -- »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.« PGP fingerprint: 5B93 61F8 4EA2 E279 ABF6 02CF A9AD B7F8 AE4E 425C |