Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 4540248
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 21, 20262026-05-21T15:03:35+00:00 2026-05-21T15:03:35+00:00

It seems that xargs doesn’t pass all the arguments at once, in says in

  • 0

It seems that xargs doesn’t pass all the arguments at once, in says in the manual that xargs executes the command (default is /bin/echo) one or more times, I heard that the reason for this is that xargs chops the passed in arguments into groups and pass them to the command group by group. If this is correct, anyone knows how this group size is determined? Thanks

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-21T15:03:36+00:00Added an answer on May 21, 2026 at 3:03 pm

    Use the --show-limits argument. It will list the existing limits on your system.

    $ xargs --show-limits
    Your environment variables take up 4108 bytes
    POSIX upper limit on argument length (this system): 2090996
    POSIX smallest allowable upper limit on argument length (all systems): 4096
    Maximum length of command we could actually use: 2086888
    Size of command buffer we are actually using: 131072
    

    The group size depends on the length of each argument passed in and the limits listed above.

    From the xargs man page, for reference:

    The POSIX standard allows implementations to have a limit on the size of arguments to the exec functions. This limit could be as low as 4096 bytes including the size of the environment. For scripts to be portable, they must not rely on a larger value. However, I know of no implementation whose actual limit is that small. The –show-limits option can be used to discover the actual limits in force on the current system.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

It seems that in a standard Xcode project, the default target automatically updates the
It seems that MSMQ doesn't use any Database management system to manage messages. How
It seems that flex doesn't support UTF-8 input. Whenever the scanner encounter a non-ASCII
Seems that mcrypt_decrypt can't proper decrypt my string (all works fine in var_dump except
It seems that svnX silently ignores all *.a files. But I want to add
Seems that even after unchecking the option in the PyDev/Debug preferenecs pane to launch
It seems that when a WPF application starts, nothing has focus. This is really
It seems that using Critical Sections quite a bit in Vista/Windows Server 2008 leads
It seems that there are several really fast prime factorization algorithms around (one that
it seems that we will put source ~/.bashrc in our .bash_profile anyway. So why

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.