@jilliagre
Welcome back to this debate. I enjoyed the previous one.
However I must quote myself:
Quote:
Post #12
Thank you markdjones82 for your response.
It is clear that this is not a '{}' issue.
I continue to be interested in variations in unix which would be relevant to writing portable shell script or diagnosis of failures.
Yet again we find ourselves not knowing what Operating System the O/P is using or what variation and vintage of "bash".
There is also uncertainty about whether this command behaved the same when run from cron or shell.
This lack of basic information in posts such as this implies that many people believe that all unix and Linux commands behave the same. They don't.
These are living Operating Systems which undergo continuous improvement and change.
On the point of {} or '{}' it is not a myth I still maintain that I have seen and repaired that problem before but cannot reproduce it in the modern Operating Systems which I have to hand. Quoting '{}' is even mentioned in current Linux "man find". A poster in this thread suggested '{}' as a solution.
I have cold build a wide variety of pre-unix O/S (including the original not-the-Mac OS/9), umpteen unix variants, mainstream manufacture unix, and assorted Linux systems.
I accept the quirks but also need to know about them.
radoulov post is very interesting and triggered a flashback to a mainstream manufacturer proprietary software suite which used to create directories and files according to whatever the user typed (complete with control codes and escape sequences). I'll play around with "find" and directories with duff names (rather than strictly files).