<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>File-Monitoring on Pi Stack</title>
    <link>https://www.pistack.xyz/tags/file-monitoring/</link>
    <description>Recent content in File-Monitoring on Pi Stack</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://www.pistack.xyz/tags/file-monitoring/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Self-Hosted File Watch Tools: watchexec vs entr vs inotify-tools Guide</title>
      <link>https://www.pistack.xyz/posts/2026-05-22-self-hosted-file-watch-tools-watchexec-vs-entr-vs-inotify-tools-guide/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.pistack.xyz/posts/2026-05-22-self-hosted-file-watch-tools-watchexec-vs-entr-vs-inotify-tools-guide/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;When you need to automatically trigger actions in response to file system changes — reloading a web server, rebuilding a project, syncing directories, or running tests — a reliable file watch tool becomes essential. Linux provides several approaches to file system event monitoring, each with different tradeoffs in portability, performance, and ease of use. This guide compares three of the most popular open-source file watch utilities: &lt;strong&gt;watchexec&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;strong&gt;entr&lt;/strong&gt;, and &lt;strong&gt;inotify-tools&lt;/strong&gt;, helping you choose the right tool for your workflow.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
