[COLUG] Re: Finding obscure programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[Richard Holbert]

Rob Funk wrote:
> In this case it sounds like a step backward.
>
> locate uses cached data, so is very fast.  find does the search when you 
> type it, so is slow.  find allows being selective about what you're 
> looking for, but you can pipe locate into grep for some of the same 
> functionality.
>
> But in this case, I'd say "whereis" beats find and locate.
Yes, what Rob said...

I prefer to use whereis.

Rick