<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Tech-Recipes - Latest Comments in Loop over a set of files from the shell</title><link>http://tech-recipes.disqus.com/</link><description>Cookbook of Tech Tutorials</description><atom:link href="https://tech-recipes.disqus.com/loop_over_a_set_of_files_from_the_shell_solaris_tech_recipes/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2004 10:41:37 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Loop over a set of files from the shell</title><link>http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/166/loop-over-a-set-of-files-from-the-shell/#comment-2767069</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Possibly a bit pedantic, but to save system time (especially if using multiple times in a script) you may be better to do the following for the last part...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;cat `ls -tr *.log` &amp;gt;biglog&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The cat is designed to be able to put two or more files together.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;By doing it this way, you don't need to worry about the existence or contents of biglog as you will overwrite it with the &amp;gt; rather than using apend to &amp;gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">guest</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2004 10:41:37 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>