> On 07/25/2007 07:12 AM,
david@lang.hm wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Rene Herman wrote:
>
>> > It certainly doesn't run for me ever. Always kind of a "that's not the
>> > point" comment but I just keep wondering whenever I see anyone complain
>> > about updatedb why the _hell_ they are running it in the first place. If
>> > anyone who never uses "locate" for anything simply disable updatedb, the
>> > problem will for a large part be solved.
>> >
>> > This not just meant as a cheap comment; while I can think of a few
>> > similar loads even on the desktop (scanning a browser cache, a media
>> > player indexing a large amount of media files, ...) I've never heard of
>> > problems _other_ than updatedb. So just junk that crap and be happy.
>>
>> but if you do use locate then the alturnative becomes sitting around and
>> waiting for find to complete on a regular basis.
>
> Yes, but what's locate's usage scenario? I've never, ever wanted to use it.
> When do you know the name of something but not where it's located, other than
> situations which "which" wouldn't cover and after just having
> installed/unpacked something meaning locate doesn't know about it yet either?
