Comparing the time of a symlink












3















I want to check whether link lnkfile is older than a regular reference file reffile.



The bash test builtin dereferences links, so test lnkfile -ot reffile compares the target of lnkfile, not the link itself.



Is there a way to make the test builtin not follow symlinks? Otherwise, how can I compare the time of a symlink?






bash shell-script symlink timestamps







share|improve this question





























    3















    I want to check whether link lnkfile is older than a regular reference file reffile.



    The bash test builtin dereferences links, so test lnkfile -ot reffile compares the target of lnkfile, not the link itself.



    Is there a way to make the test builtin not follow symlinks? Otherwise, how can I compare the time of a symlink?






    bash shell-script symlink timestamps







    share|improve this question



























      3












      3








      3








      I want to check whether link lnkfile is older than a regular reference file reffile.



      The bash test builtin dereferences links, so test lnkfile -ot reffile compares the target of lnkfile, not the link itself.



      Is there a way to make the test builtin not follow symlinks? Otherwise, how can I compare the time of a symlink?






      bash shell-script symlink timestamps







      share|improve this question
















      I want to check whether link lnkfile is older than a regular reference file reffile.



      The bash test builtin dereferences links, so test lnkfile -ot reffile compares the target of lnkfile, not the link itself.



      Is there a way to make the test builtin not follow symlinks? Otherwise, how can I compare the time of a symlink?






      bash shell-script symlink timestamps




      bash shell-script symlink timestamps






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 4 hours ago









      Jeff Schaller

      39.7k1054126




      39.7k1054126










      asked 5 hours ago









      L. LevrelL. Levrel

      1,167412




      1,167412






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2














          As far as I know, bash doesn't offer any versions of -ot (and the like) which avoid dereferencing symlinks.



          What you can do instead is use GNU stat (which doesn't dereference symbolic links without -L) and compare their mtime epochs numerically:



          if (( "$(stat --format=%Z lnkfile)" < "$(stat --format=%Z reffile)" )); then
          
    # lnkfile is older
          
fi





          share|improve this answer































            0














            I don't think there is a way with test, but you could use find.



            test "$(find lnkfile ! -newer reffile)" && command


            Here, find returns output if lnkfile is older than reffile. test without an option is equivalent to test -n. This is true if the length of the string is nonzero. Hence, if there is output from find, command is executed.






            share|improve this answer


























            • What test implementation do you have that does not have -n? It's a standard option... Also quote the command substitution.

              – Kusalananda
              4 hours ago













            • @Kusalananda I'm just confirming that no options is identical to -n, so it's easier to grep the man. Good point with the quote. Thanks.

              – Sparhawk
              4 hours ago













            • I misunderstood what you were saying about -n and read it as "there is no -n option" instead of "test without an option is the same as test -n".

              – Kusalananda
              3 hours ago











            • @Kusalananda Ah got it. I edited to clarify my ambiguous language. Thanks again.

              – Sparhawk
              2 hours ago











            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "106"
            };
            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: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            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
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f495864%2fcomparing-the-time-of-a-symlink%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









            2














            As far as I know, bash doesn't offer any versions of -ot (and the like) which avoid dereferencing symlinks.



            What you can do instead is use GNU stat (which doesn't dereference symbolic links without -L) and compare their mtime epochs numerically:



            if (( "$(stat --format=%Z lnkfile)" < "$(stat --format=%Z reffile)" )); then
            
    # lnkfile is older
            
fi





            share|improve this answer




























              2














              As far as I know, bash doesn't offer any versions of -ot (and the like) which avoid dereferencing symlinks.



              What you can do instead is use GNU stat (which doesn't dereference symbolic links without -L) and compare their mtime epochs numerically:



              if (( "$(stat --format=%Z lnkfile)" < "$(stat --format=%Z reffile)" )); then
              
    # lnkfile is older
              
fi





              share|improve this answer


























                2












                2








                2







                As far as I know, bash doesn't offer any versions of -ot (and the like) which avoid dereferencing symlinks.



                What you can do instead is use GNU stat (which doesn't dereference symbolic links without -L) and compare their mtime epochs numerically:



                if (( "$(stat --format=%Z lnkfile)" < "$(stat --format=%Z reffile)" )); then
                
    # lnkfile is older
                
fi





                share|improve this answer













                As far as I know, bash doesn't offer any versions of -ot (and the like) which avoid dereferencing symlinks.



                What you can do instead is use GNU stat (which doesn't dereference symbolic links without -L) and compare their mtime epochs numerically:



                if (( "$(stat --format=%Z lnkfile)" < "$(stat --format=%Z reffile)" )); then
                
    # lnkfile is older
                
fi






                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 5 hours ago









                Chris DownChris Down

                79.7k14188202




                79.7k14188202

























                    0














                    I don't think there is a way with test, but you could use find.



                    test "$(find lnkfile ! -newer reffile)" && command


                    Here, find returns output if lnkfile is older than reffile. test without an option is equivalent to test -n. This is true if the length of the string is nonzero. Hence, if there is output from find, command is executed.






                    share|improve this answer


























                    • What test implementation do you have that does not have -n? It's a standard option... Also quote the command substitution.

                      – Kusalananda
                      4 hours ago













                    • @Kusalananda I'm just confirming that no options is identical to -n, so it's easier to grep the man. Good point with the quote. Thanks.

                      – Sparhawk
                      4 hours ago













                    • I misunderstood what you were saying about -n and read it as "there is no -n option" instead of "test without an option is the same as test -n".

                      – Kusalananda
                      3 hours ago











                    • @Kusalananda Ah got it. I edited to clarify my ambiguous language. Thanks again.

                      – Sparhawk
                      2 hours ago
















                    0














                    I don't think there is a way with test, but you could use find.



                    test "$(find lnkfile ! -newer reffile)" && command


                    Here, find returns output if lnkfile is older than reffile. test without an option is equivalent to test -n. This is true if the length of the string is nonzero. Hence, if there is output from find, command is executed.






                    share|improve this answer


























                    • What test implementation do you have that does not have -n? It's a standard option... Also quote the command substitution.

                      – Kusalananda
                      4 hours ago













                    • @Kusalananda I'm just confirming that no options is identical to -n, so it's easier to grep the man. Good point with the quote. Thanks.

                      – Sparhawk
                      4 hours ago













                    • I misunderstood what you were saying about -n and read it as "there is no -n option" instead of "test without an option is the same as test -n".

                      – Kusalananda
                      3 hours ago











                    • @Kusalananda Ah got it. I edited to clarify my ambiguous language. Thanks again.

                      – Sparhawk
                      2 hours ago














                    0












                    0








                    0







                    I don't think there is a way with test, but you could use find.



                    test "$(find lnkfile ! -newer reffile)" && command


                    Here, find returns output if lnkfile is older than reffile. test without an option is equivalent to test -n. This is true if the length of the string is nonzero. Hence, if there is output from find, command is executed.






                    share|improve this answer















                    I don't think there is a way with test, but you could use find.



                    test "$(find lnkfile ! -newer reffile)" && command


                    Here, find returns output if lnkfile is older than reffile. test without an option is equivalent to test -n. This is true if the length of the string is nonzero. Hence, if there is output from find, command is executed.







                    share|improve this answer














                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer








                    edited 2 hours ago

























                    answered 5 hours ago









                    SparhawkSparhawk

                    9,48263992




                    9,48263992













                    • What test implementation do you have that does not have -n? It's a standard option... Also quote the command substitution.

                      – Kusalananda
                      4 hours ago













                    • @Kusalananda I'm just confirming that no options is identical to -n, so it's easier to grep the man. Good point with the quote. Thanks.

                      – Sparhawk
                      4 hours ago













                    • I misunderstood what you were saying about -n and read it as "there is no -n option" instead of "test without an option is the same as test -n".

                      – Kusalananda
                      3 hours ago











                    • @Kusalananda Ah got it. I edited to clarify my ambiguous language. Thanks again.

                      – Sparhawk
                      2 hours ago



















                    • What test implementation do you have that does not have -n? It's a standard option... Also quote the command substitution.

                      – Kusalananda
                      4 hours ago













                    • @Kusalananda I'm just confirming that no options is identical to -n, so it's easier to grep the man. Good point with the quote. Thanks.

                      – Sparhawk
                      4 hours ago













                    • I misunderstood what you were saying about -n and read it as "there is no -n option" instead of "test without an option is the same as test -n".

                      – Kusalananda
                      3 hours ago











                    • @Kusalananda Ah got it. I edited to clarify my ambiguous language. Thanks again.

                      – Sparhawk
                      2 hours ago

















                    What test implementation do you have that does not have -n? It's a standard option... Also quote the command substitution.

                    – Kusalananda
                    4 hours ago







                    What test implementation do you have that does not have -n? It's a standard option... Also quote the command substitution.

                    – Kusalananda
                    4 hours ago















                    @Kusalananda I'm just confirming that no options is identical to -n, so it's easier to grep the man. Good point with the quote. Thanks.

                    – Sparhawk
                    4 hours ago







                    @Kusalananda I'm just confirming that no options is identical to -n, so it's easier to grep the man. Good point with the quote. Thanks.

                    – Sparhawk
                    4 hours ago















                    I misunderstood what you were saying about -n and read it as "there is no -n option" instead of "test without an option is the same as test -n".

                    – Kusalananda
                    3 hours ago





                    I misunderstood what you were saying about -n and read it as "there is no -n option" instead of "test without an option is the same as test -n".

                    – Kusalananda
                    3 hours ago













                    @Kusalananda Ah got it. I edited to clarify my ambiguous language. Thanks again.

                    – Sparhawk
                    2 hours ago





                    @Kusalananda Ah got it. I edited to clarify my ambiguous language. Thanks again.

                    – Sparhawk
                    2 hours ago


















                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


                    • 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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f495864%2fcomparing-the-time-of-a-symlink%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    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







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Accessing regular linux commands in Huawei's Dopra Linux

                    Image
                    4 Backstory: I have a Huawei HG8245 router in my house and I want to change the default username/password. I've tried following this guide but the config file always gets reset. My ISP isn't helping either so I'm looking for other ways to accomplish this. The router has telnet access so this seems like a way to change the credentials. The first shell I gain access to looks like this: WAP> Pressing "?" gives me a list of available commands which I've pasted here, the two interesting ones are "su" and "shell". I can't seem to get su access, even after logging in as root (challenge password prompt, and then nothing happens), but shell gives me a proper linux shell. WAP>shell BusyBox v1.18.4 (2017-12-26 17:06:34 CST) built-in shell (ash) Enter 'hel...
                    Read more

                    Can't connect RFCOMM socket: Host is down

                    Image
                    up vote 3 down vote favorite I have bluez 5.4.3 and I am attempting to communicate with a ble device through minicom. These two deceives (my computer and a bluno nano) are alreadt paired and this has been my method so far. #bluetoothctl # pair xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx # exit Everything is working well so far then... #sudo rfcomm connect /dev/rfcomm0 xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx 1 & [1] 3665 Can't connect RFCOMM socket: Host is down Does anyone know how to resolve this issue? Any help would be very much appreciated. bluetooth bluez share | improve this question asked Feb 9 '17 at 18:46 Brandon Knape 46 2 ...
                    Read more

                    Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal Exception in Interrupt

                    Image
                    0 Every day this error occured on my pc, kernel panic error on interrupt, what will be the problem? linux-mint share asked 6 mins ago Vinod Selvin Vinod Selvin 1 1 New contributor Vinod Selvin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct. add a comment ...
                    Read more