commandlinefu.com is the place to record those command-line gems that you return to again and again.
Delete that bloated snippets file you've been using and share your personal repository with the world. That way others can gain from your CLI wisdom and you from theirs too. All commands can be commented on, discussed and voted up or down.
If you have a new feature suggestion or find a bug, please get in touch via http://commandlinefu.uservoice.com/
You can sign-in using OpenID credentials, or register a traditional username and password.
First-time OpenID users will be automatically assigned a username which can be changed after signing in.
Every new command is wrapped in a tweet and posted to Twitter. Following the stream is a great way of staying abreast of the latest commands. For the more discerning, there are Twitter accounts for commands that get a minimum of 3 and 10 votes - that way only the great commands get tweeted.
» http://twitter.com/commandlinefu
» http://twitter.com/commandlinefu3
» http://twitter.com/commandlinefu10
Use your favourite RSS aggregator to stay in touch with the latest commands. There are feeds mirroring the 3 Twitter streams as well as for virtually every other subset (users, tags, functions,…):
Subscribe to the feed for:
There are 2 alternatives - vote for the best!
Usage example:
newest Desktop/*
Replace "-nt" with "-ot" for oldest.
Run
shopt -s dotglob
first to include dotfiles.
Works recusivley in the specified dir or '.' if none given.
Repeatedly calls 'find' to find a newer file, when no newer files exist you have the newest.
In this case 'newest' means most recently modified. To find the most recently created change -newer to -cnewer.
If you can do better, submit your command here.
You must be signed in to comment.
I gave my vote to this one:
newest () { find ${1:-\.} -type f |xargs ls -lrt ; }
But I have to ask, why write a function for this when a simple $(ls -ltr) would do? Then again, are we assuming the last file that was modified in that directory wasn't a .file? Then we should do $(ls -altr). My $0.02.
I forgot to mention that this function is better for recursive use.
dis you ever try an
ls -lrtRls is not not efficiently for this.
The top command only works if the list of files is small enough to fit in a single run of ls -- the purpose of xargs is to split a very large number of arguments up according to the OS's maximum supported (usually 4096 at a time or so). So, there will be a separate call to ls -lrt for every batch of 4096 files, and the file at the bottom is the newest in the last batch, but not necessarily the newest overall.
The one by glennie will work (I think), because the "sort -n" waits for the entire output of find before sorting.