Folder comparison Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Same folder, different sizeBash comparison and expression operatorsUnity desktop folder conundrumBash script, cannote replace string in a file with escaped $ and &Folder name comparing - scriptHow to get real-time completion/suggestions in Linux terminal?Complex Number and String comparisonFolder permission issue17.10 personal folder locationCreate bash script that allows you to choose multiple options instead of just one?
How does TikZ render an arc?
Why not use the yoke to control yaw, as well as pitch and roll?
latest version of QGIS fails to edit attribute table of GeoJSON file
Did John Wesley plagiarize Matthew Henry...?
Did any compiler fully use 80-bit floating point?
Pointing to problems without suggesting solutions
Inverse square law not accurate for non-point masses?
Why is a lens darker than other ones when applying the same settings?
Why complex landing gears are used instead of simple, reliable and light weight muscle wire or shape memory alloys?
What is the proper term for etching or digging of wall to hide conduit of cables
How to make triangles with rounded sides and corners? (squircle with 3 sides)
What did Turing mean when saying that "machines cannot give rise to surprises" is due to a fallacy?
The bible of geometry: Is there a modern treatment of geometries from the most primitive to the most advanced?
Statistical analysis applied to methods coming out of Machine Learning
One-one communication
Find general formula for the terms
systemd and copy (/bin/cp): no such file or directory
As a dual citizen, my US passport will expire one day after traveling to the US. Will this work?
Why weren't discrete x86 CPUs ever used in game hardware?
Does the Rock Gnome trait Artificer's Lore apply when you aren't proficient in History?
My mentor says to set image to Fine instead of RAW — how is this different from JPG?
Is this Kuo-toa homebrew race balanced?
How do Java 8 default methods hеlp with lambdas?
Did pre-Columbian Americans know the spherical shape of the Earth?
Folder comparison
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Same folder, different sizeBash comparison and expression operatorsUnity desktop folder conundrumBash script, cannote replace string in a file with escaped $ and &Folder name comparing - scriptHow to get real-time completion/suggestions in Linux terminal?Complex Number and String comparisonFolder permission issue17.10 personal folder locationCreate bash script that allows you to choose multiple options instead of just one?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I have two folders with similar subfolder structures, which I would like to compare. For example:
A
├── child-1
├── child-2
├── child-3
├── child-4
├── child-5
and
B
├── child-1-some-text
├── child-2-more-text
├── child-3-nothing
├── child-6-random-text
├── child-7-more-random-text
I would like to list all those subfolders from A
which are prefix for a subfolder in B
and list corresponding subfolders from B
as well. The expected output is
child-1 -- child-1-some-text
child-2 -- child-2-more-text
child-3 -- child-3-nothing
A secondary requirement: If multiple matches in B
, then it should give an error / warning.
My solution:
cd A
for f in `ls -d */`;
do
cd B;
new_dirs=(`ls -1d $f*`);
cd -;
if [ $#new_dirs[@] -eq 0 ]
then
## DO_Nothing
continue;
elif [ $#new_dirs[@] -gt 1 ]
then
echo "Multiple matches to $f";
continue;
else
echo "Unique Match found to $f -- $new_dirs[0]";
continue;
fi;
done
Problem:
For those values of $f
, which have no corresponding subfolders in B
, the array construction is giving me an error. e.g.:
ls: cannot access 'child-4*': No such file or directory
Question
- How to get rid of these errors?
- Is there better way to achieve the goal(s) then the one in my code?
Thanks in advance!
bash directory
add a comment |
I have two folders with similar subfolder structures, which I would like to compare. For example:
A
├── child-1
├── child-2
├── child-3
├── child-4
├── child-5
and
B
├── child-1-some-text
├── child-2-more-text
├── child-3-nothing
├── child-6-random-text
├── child-7-more-random-text
I would like to list all those subfolders from A
which are prefix for a subfolder in B
and list corresponding subfolders from B
as well. The expected output is
child-1 -- child-1-some-text
child-2 -- child-2-more-text
child-3 -- child-3-nothing
A secondary requirement: If multiple matches in B
, then it should give an error / warning.
My solution:
cd A
for f in `ls -d */`;
do
cd B;
new_dirs=(`ls -1d $f*`);
cd -;
if [ $#new_dirs[@] -eq 0 ]
then
## DO_Nothing
continue;
elif [ $#new_dirs[@] -gt 1 ]
then
echo "Multiple matches to $f";
continue;
else
echo "Unique Match found to $f -- $new_dirs[0]";
continue;
fi;
done
Problem:
For those values of $f
, which have no corresponding subfolders in B
, the array construction is giving me an error. e.g.:
ls: cannot access 'child-4*': No such file or directory
Question
- How to get rid of these errors?
- Is there better way to achieve the goal(s) then the one in my code?
Thanks in advance!
bash directory
4
+1 for providing an almost working solution!
– user5325
Mar 24 at 13:03
This is not an answer to your specific question, but you can usediff -rq DIR1 DIR2
to compare not just directory structure, but file contents.
– John Wiersba
Mar 28 at 18:32
add a comment |
I have two folders with similar subfolder structures, which I would like to compare. For example:
A
├── child-1
├── child-2
├── child-3
├── child-4
├── child-5
and
B
├── child-1-some-text
├── child-2-more-text
├── child-3-nothing
├── child-6-random-text
├── child-7-more-random-text
I would like to list all those subfolders from A
which are prefix for a subfolder in B
and list corresponding subfolders from B
as well. The expected output is
child-1 -- child-1-some-text
child-2 -- child-2-more-text
child-3 -- child-3-nothing
A secondary requirement: If multiple matches in B
, then it should give an error / warning.
My solution:
cd A
for f in `ls -d */`;
do
cd B;
new_dirs=(`ls -1d $f*`);
cd -;
if [ $#new_dirs[@] -eq 0 ]
then
## DO_Nothing
continue;
elif [ $#new_dirs[@] -gt 1 ]
then
echo "Multiple matches to $f";
continue;
else
echo "Unique Match found to $f -- $new_dirs[0]";
continue;
fi;
done
Problem:
For those values of $f
, which have no corresponding subfolders in B
, the array construction is giving me an error. e.g.:
ls: cannot access 'child-4*': No such file or directory
Question
- How to get rid of these errors?
- Is there better way to achieve the goal(s) then the one in my code?
Thanks in advance!
bash directory
I have two folders with similar subfolder structures, which I would like to compare. For example:
A
├── child-1
├── child-2
├── child-3
├── child-4
├── child-5
and
B
├── child-1-some-text
├── child-2-more-text
├── child-3-nothing
├── child-6-random-text
├── child-7-more-random-text
I would like to list all those subfolders from A
which are prefix for a subfolder in B
and list corresponding subfolders from B
as well. The expected output is
child-1 -- child-1-some-text
child-2 -- child-2-more-text
child-3 -- child-3-nothing
A secondary requirement: If multiple matches in B
, then it should give an error / warning.
My solution:
cd A
for f in `ls -d */`;
do
cd B;
new_dirs=(`ls -1d $f*`);
cd -;
if [ $#new_dirs[@] -eq 0 ]
then
## DO_Nothing
continue;
elif [ $#new_dirs[@] -gt 1 ]
then
echo "Multiple matches to $f";
continue;
else
echo "Unique Match found to $f -- $new_dirs[0]";
continue;
fi;
done
Problem:
For those values of $f
, which have no corresponding subfolders in B
, the array construction is giving me an error. e.g.:
ls: cannot access 'child-4*': No such file or directory
Question
- How to get rid of these errors?
- Is there better way to achieve the goal(s) then the one in my code?
Thanks in advance!
bash directory
bash directory
edited Mar 24 at 13:54
wjandrea
9,57142765
9,57142765
asked Mar 24 at 12:56
Mike V.D.C.Mike V.D.C.
3971215
3971215
4
+1 for providing an almost working solution!
– user5325
Mar 24 at 13:03
This is not an answer to your specific question, but you can usediff -rq DIR1 DIR2
to compare not just directory structure, but file contents.
– John Wiersba
Mar 28 at 18:32
add a comment |
4
+1 for providing an almost working solution!
– user5325
Mar 24 at 13:03
This is not an answer to your specific question, but you can usediff -rq DIR1 DIR2
to compare not just directory structure, but file contents.
– John Wiersba
Mar 28 at 18:32
4
4
+1 for providing an almost working solution!
– user5325
Mar 24 at 13:03
+1 for providing an almost working solution!
– user5325
Mar 24 at 13:03
This is not an answer to your specific question, but you can use
diff -rq DIR1 DIR2
to compare not just directory structure, but file contents.– John Wiersba
Mar 28 at 18:32
This is not an answer to your specific question, but you can use
diff -rq DIR1 DIR2
to compare not just directory structure, but file contents.– John Wiersba
Mar 28 at 18:32
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
The better way
Don't parse ls
; use globs instead. In fact you're already using globs, just wrapping them in ls
, which is pointless. You just need nullglob
turned on for when there are no matches.
Also avoiding cd
simplifies things.
#!/bin/bash
shopt -s nullglob
dir1=A
dir2=B
for dir in "$dir1"/*/; do
basename="$(basename -- "$dir")"
dirs_match=( "$dir2/$basename"*/ )
case $#dirs_match[@] in
0)
;;
1)
echo "Unique match for $dir: $dirs_match[*]"
;;
*)
echo "Multiple matches for $dir: $dirs_match[*]" >&2
;;
esac
done
Output:
Unique match for A/child-1/: B/child-1-some-text/
Unique match for A/child-2/: B/child-2-more-text/
Multiple matches for A/child-3/: B/child-3-nothing/ B/child-3-something/
I added B/child-3-something
to test the secondary requirement. This creates the directory structure for testing:
mkdir -p A/child-1..5 B/child-1-some-text,2-more-text,3-nothing,3-something,6-random-text,7-more-random-text
By the way, ShellCheck is very useful for finding problems in shell scripts.
ShellCheck.net is interesting, do you know if it uploads everything to it's own servers, or is it all done locally? Just wondering about the privacy of entered info. [Installing theshellcheck
package would be the most secure]
– Xen2050
Mar 24 at 16:28
@Xen2050 Just tried toggling my internet off while on the site, and it seems to upload. I would imagine it doesn't keep it, but not sure. And yes the package is good; I use an Atom plugin that uses it.
– wjandrea
Mar 24 at 17:20
Thanks for the suggestions. And also tons of thanks for pointing towardsShellCheck
. I loved the part where it not only tells you your errors, but also gives suggestions! @Xen2050, about the uploading part, I just installedshellcheck
usingapt
and then disabled network. It seems to be working without internet.
– Mike V.D.C.
Mar 25 at 4:53
add a comment |
Calling ls
on a non existent folder throws the error message that you encountered. The easy way is to just ignore this by replacing line 5 in your script with this: new_dirs=(`ls -1d $f* 2> /dev/null`);
.
Have you tested this? Stderr seems to get ignored by default, when I runt=(`echo ok; echo err 1>&2`)
$t (or$t[@]
) only contains ok, err is seen in the terminal but not saved anyway. Or is there something funny about my test?
– Xen2050
Mar 25 at 22:51
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
;
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: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
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
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1128280%2ffolder-comparison%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The better way
Don't parse ls
; use globs instead. In fact you're already using globs, just wrapping them in ls
, which is pointless. You just need nullglob
turned on for when there are no matches.
Also avoiding cd
simplifies things.
#!/bin/bash
shopt -s nullglob
dir1=A
dir2=B
for dir in "$dir1"/*/; do
basename="$(basename -- "$dir")"
dirs_match=( "$dir2/$basename"*/ )
case $#dirs_match[@] in
0)
;;
1)
echo "Unique match for $dir: $dirs_match[*]"
;;
*)
echo "Multiple matches for $dir: $dirs_match[*]" >&2
;;
esac
done
Output:
Unique match for A/child-1/: B/child-1-some-text/
Unique match for A/child-2/: B/child-2-more-text/
Multiple matches for A/child-3/: B/child-3-nothing/ B/child-3-something/
I added B/child-3-something
to test the secondary requirement. This creates the directory structure for testing:
mkdir -p A/child-1..5 B/child-1-some-text,2-more-text,3-nothing,3-something,6-random-text,7-more-random-text
By the way, ShellCheck is very useful for finding problems in shell scripts.
ShellCheck.net is interesting, do you know if it uploads everything to it's own servers, or is it all done locally? Just wondering about the privacy of entered info. [Installing theshellcheck
package would be the most secure]
– Xen2050
Mar 24 at 16:28
@Xen2050 Just tried toggling my internet off while on the site, and it seems to upload. I would imagine it doesn't keep it, but not sure. And yes the package is good; I use an Atom plugin that uses it.
– wjandrea
Mar 24 at 17:20
Thanks for the suggestions. And also tons of thanks for pointing towardsShellCheck
. I loved the part where it not only tells you your errors, but also gives suggestions! @Xen2050, about the uploading part, I just installedshellcheck
usingapt
and then disabled network. It seems to be working without internet.
– Mike V.D.C.
Mar 25 at 4:53
add a comment |
The better way
Don't parse ls
; use globs instead. In fact you're already using globs, just wrapping them in ls
, which is pointless. You just need nullglob
turned on for when there are no matches.
Also avoiding cd
simplifies things.
#!/bin/bash
shopt -s nullglob
dir1=A
dir2=B
for dir in "$dir1"/*/; do
basename="$(basename -- "$dir")"
dirs_match=( "$dir2/$basename"*/ )
case $#dirs_match[@] in
0)
;;
1)
echo "Unique match for $dir: $dirs_match[*]"
;;
*)
echo "Multiple matches for $dir: $dirs_match[*]" >&2
;;
esac
done
Output:
Unique match for A/child-1/: B/child-1-some-text/
Unique match for A/child-2/: B/child-2-more-text/
Multiple matches for A/child-3/: B/child-3-nothing/ B/child-3-something/
I added B/child-3-something
to test the secondary requirement. This creates the directory structure for testing:
mkdir -p A/child-1..5 B/child-1-some-text,2-more-text,3-nothing,3-something,6-random-text,7-more-random-text
By the way, ShellCheck is very useful for finding problems in shell scripts.
ShellCheck.net is interesting, do you know if it uploads everything to it's own servers, or is it all done locally? Just wondering about the privacy of entered info. [Installing theshellcheck
package would be the most secure]
– Xen2050
Mar 24 at 16:28
@Xen2050 Just tried toggling my internet off while on the site, and it seems to upload. I would imagine it doesn't keep it, but not sure. And yes the package is good; I use an Atom plugin that uses it.
– wjandrea
Mar 24 at 17:20
Thanks for the suggestions. And also tons of thanks for pointing towardsShellCheck
. I loved the part where it not only tells you your errors, but also gives suggestions! @Xen2050, about the uploading part, I just installedshellcheck
usingapt
and then disabled network. It seems to be working without internet.
– Mike V.D.C.
Mar 25 at 4:53
add a comment |
The better way
Don't parse ls
; use globs instead. In fact you're already using globs, just wrapping them in ls
, which is pointless. You just need nullglob
turned on for when there are no matches.
Also avoiding cd
simplifies things.
#!/bin/bash
shopt -s nullglob
dir1=A
dir2=B
for dir in "$dir1"/*/; do
basename="$(basename -- "$dir")"
dirs_match=( "$dir2/$basename"*/ )
case $#dirs_match[@] in
0)
;;
1)
echo "Unique match for $dir: $dirs_match[*]"
;;
*)
echo "Multiple matches for $dir: $dirs_match[*]" >&2
;;
esac
done
Output:
Unique match for A/child-1/: B/child-1-some-text/
Unique match for A/child-2/: B/child-2-more-text/
Multiple matches for A/child-3/: B/child-3-nothing/ B/child-3-something/
I added B/child-3-something
to test the secondary requirement. This creates the directory structure for testing:
mkdir -p A/child-1..5 B/child-1-some-text,2-more-text,3-nothing,3-something,6-random-text,7-more-random-text
By the way, ShellCheck is very useful for finding problems in shell scripts.
The better way
Don't parse ls
; use globs instead. In fact you're already using globs, just wrapping them in ls
, which is pointless. You just need nullglob
turned on for when there are no matches.
Also avoiding cd
simplifies things.
#!/bin/bash
shopt -s nullglob
dir1=A
dir2=B
for dir in "$dir1"/*/; do
basename="$(basename -- "$dir")"
dirs_match=( "$dir2/$basename"*/ )
case $#dirs_match[@] in
0)
;;
1)
echo "Unique match for $dir: $dirs_match[*]"
;;
*)
echo "Multiple matches for $dir: $dirs_match[*]" >&2
;;
esac
done
Output:
Unique match for A/child-1/: B/child-1-some-text/
Unique match for A/child-2/: B/child-2-more-text/
Multiple matches for A/child-3/: B/child-3-nothing/ B/child-3-something/
I added B/child-3-something
to test the secondary requirement. This creates the directory structure for testing:
mkdir -p A/child-1..5 B/child-1-some-text,2-more-text,3-nothing,3-something,6-random-text,7-more-random-text
By the way, ShellCheck is very useful for finding problems in shell scripts.
edited Mar 24 at 17:15
answered Mar 24 at 14:39
wjandreawjandrea
9,57142765
9,57142765
ShellCheck.net is interesting, do you know if it uploads everything to it's own servers, or is it all done locally? Just wondering about the privacy of entered info. [Installing theshellcheck
package would be the most secure]
– Xen2050
Mar 24 at 16:28
@Xen2050 Just tried toggling my internet off while on the site, and it seems to upload. I would imagine it doesn't keep it, but not sure. And yes the package is good; I use an Atom plugin that uses it.
– wjandrea
Mar 24 at 17:20
Thanks for the suggestions. And also tons of thanks for pointing towardsShellCheck
. I loved the part where it not only tells you your errors, but also gives suggestions! @Xen2050, about the uploading part, I just installedshellcheck
usingapt
and then disabled network. It seems to be working without internet.
– Mike V.D.C.
Mar 25 at 4:53
add a comment |
ShellCheck.net is interesting, do you know if it uploads everything to it's own servers, or is it all done locally? Just wondering about the privacy of entered info. [Installing theshellcheck
package would be the most secure]
– Xen2050
Mar 24 at 16:28
@Xen2050 Just tried toggling my internet off while on the site, and it seems to upload. I would imagine it doesn't keep it, but not sure. And yes the package is good; I use an Atom plugin that uses it.
– wjandrea
Mar 24 at 17:20
Thanks for the suggestions. And also tons of thanks for pointing towardsShellCheck
. I loved the part where it not only tells you your errors, but also gives suggestions! @Xen2050, about the uploading part, I just installedshellcheck
usingapt
and then disabled network. It seems to be working without internet.
– Mike V.D.C.
Mar 25 at 4:53
ShellCheck.net is interesting, do you know if it uploads everything to it's own servers, or is it all done locally? Just wondering about the privacy of entered info. [Installing the
shellcheck
package would be the most secure]– Xen2050
Mar 24 at 16:28
ShellCheck.net is interesting, do you know if it uploads everything to it's own servers, or is it all done locally? Just wondering about the privacy of entered info. [Installing the
shellcheck
package would be the most secure]– Xen2050
Mar 24 at 16:28
@Xen2050 Just tried toggling my internet off while on the site, and it seems to upload. I would imagine it doesn't keep it, but not sure. And yes the package is good; I use an Atom plugin that uses it.
– wjandrea
Mar 24 at 17:20
@Xen2050 Just tried toggling my internet off while on the site, and it seems to upload. I would imagine it doesn't keep it, but not sure. And yes the package is good; I use an Atom plugin that uses it.
– wjandrea
Mar 24 at 17:20
Thanks for the suggestions. And also tons of thanks for pointing towards
ShellCheck
. I loved the part where it not only tells you your errors, but also gives suggestions! @Xen2050, about the uploading part, I just installed shellcheck
using apt
and then disabled network. It seems to be working without internet.– Mike V.D.C.
Mar 25 at 4:53
Thanks for the suggestions. And also tons of thanks for pointing towards
ShellCheck
. I loved the part where it not only tells you your errors, but also gives suggestions! @Xen2050, about the uploading part, I just installed shellcheck
using apt
and then disabled network. It seems to be working without internet.– Mike V.D.C.
Mar 25 at 4:53
add a comment |
Calling ls
on a non existent folder throws the error message that you encountered. The easy way is to just ignore this by replacing line 5 in your script with this: new_dirs=(`ls -1d $f* 2> /dev/null`);
.
Have you tested this? Stderr seems to get ignored by default, when I runt=(`echo ok; echo err 1>&2`)
$t (or$t[@]
) only contains ok, err is seen in the terminal but not saved anyway. Or is there something funny about my test?
– Xen2050
Mar 25 at 22:51
add a comment |
Calling ls
on a non existent folder throws the error message that you encountered. The easy way is to just ignore this by replacing line 5 in your script with this: new_dirs=(`ls -1d $f* 2> /dev/null`);
.
Have you tested this? Stderr seems to get ignored by default, when I runt=(`echo ok; echo err 1>&2`)
$t (or$t[@]
) only contains ok, err is seen in the terminal but not saved anyway. Or is there something funny about my test?
– Xen2050
Mar 25 at 22:51
add a comment |
Calling ls
on a non existent folder throws the error message that you encountered. The easy way is to just ignore this by replacing line 5 in your script with this: new_dirs=(`ls -1d $f* 2> /dev/null`);
.
Calling ls
on a non existent folder throws the error message that you encountered. The easy way is to just ignore this by replacing line 5 in your script with this: new_dirs=(`ls -1d $f* 2> /dev/null`);
.
answered Mar 24 at 13:53
cauoncauon
1,6341021
1,6341021
Have you tested this? Stderr seems to get ignored by default, when I runt=(`echo ok; echo err 1>&2`)
$t (or$t[@]
) only contains ok, err is seen in the terminal but not saved anyway. Or is there something funny about my test?
– Xen2050
Mar 25 at 22:51
add a comment |
Have you tested this? Stderr seems to get ignored by default, when I runt=(`echo ok; echo err 1>&2`)
$t (or$t[@]
) only contains ok, err is seen in the terminal but not saved anyway. Or is there something funny about my test?
– Xen2050
Mar 25 at 22:51
Have you tested this? Stderr seems to get ignored by default, when I run
t=(`echo ok; echo err 1>&2`)
$t (or $t[@]
) only contains ok, err is seen in the terminal but not saved anyway. Or is there something funny about my test?– Xen2050
Mar 25 at 22:51
Have you tested this? Stderr seems to get ignored by default, when I run
t=(`echo ok; echo err 1>&2`)
$t (or $t[@]
) only contains ok, err is seen in the terminal but not saved anyway. Or is there something funny about my test?– Xen2050
Mar 25 at 22:51
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- 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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1128280%2ffolder-comparison%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
4
+1 for providing an almost working solution!
– user5325
Mar 24 at 13:03
This is not an answer to your specific question, but you can use
diff -rq DIR1 DIR2
to compare not just directory structure, but file contents.– John Wiersba
Mar 28 at 18:32