I am using an Apache tool called Sentora, which forces me to have my [root] directory to be etc/sentora/panel .......causing me the big problem of killing my browsing to /var/www/html as my [root] folder, rendering it unreachable.
2018-03-01 19:50:40.224088 [ERR] switch_core_sqldb.c:1197 SQL ERR: [select call_id,sip_user,sip_host,contact,status,rpid,expires,user_agent,server_user,server_host,profile_name,network_ip, network_port,0,sip_realm from sip_registrations where expires > 0 and expires <= 1519905040] database disk image is malformed
Depending on the actual content of myScript.sh, you might be able to use input redirection to use the file as input to the script: ./myScript.sh < /path/to/file
Or if file contains a list of file-names to search - you might be able to use xargs: cat file | xargs ./myScript.sh
But again, xargs usage would depend on what myScript.sh actually does. We don't really know anything about your script, what parameters it is set up to take etc etc.
Or you could just set up your script to explicitly take the path to a file as a parameter:
# if number of parameters to script is 1 AND the parameter is the path to a file
if [ $# -eq 1 ] && [ -f $1 ] ; then
grep -iHn --color "regex" $1 # Search the file
echo "ERROR - Script takes 1 parameter which must be the path to an existing file"
exit 1 # Exit with error status
And then you would run your script like this: ./myScript.sh /path/to/file
Obviously the above example was completley contrived. I don't know what your actual script does. But my example should give you an idea on how to modify your script to take a file-name as a parameter, if that is what you want to do.....
Thanks. Most of those errors and solutions happen after the system boots. I can't even get to the login screen without this error. If I unplug the new HDD everything works fine but as soon as I plug it in I get those ata errors. I probably purchased the HDD about a year ago but I'm pretty sure this is the first time I've ever used it, so it's pretty much brand new. I'm thinging that it's either a bad HDD or maybe it's using too much power along with the other two HDDs + one SSD.
I have a script that uses grep to extract data from a file. It works but I am now trying to modify the script for pipeline use. If I use the commands: cat file | myScript.sh there is an error because the data reaches myScript.sh as it was collected by an echo command (grep: LINE: No such file or directory).
Is there a way to pass 'file' as an argument to myScript.sh so that grep can work as it was originally meant?
I think I figured it out with your help and yes, it was a naming issue. There was two different directories for the album on my computer, one named 'A Rush Of Blood To The Head' and the other named 'A Rush of Blood to the Head'. On ext4 this was fine but apparantly on the fat32 sd card they were considered to have the same name. Thanks for your help, got this figured out. :)
me@mothership ~ $ rsync -nrv --ignore-existing --exclude=.Trash-1000 --exclude=.audio_data /media/me/media-drive/music/ /media/me/MEDIA-SD/
sending incremental file list
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/01. Politik.flac
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/02. In My Place.flac
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/03. God Put A Smile Upon Your Face.flac
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/04. The Scientist.flac
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/05. Clocks.flac
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/06. Daylight.flac
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/07. Green Eyes.flac
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/08. Warning Sign.flac
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/09. A Whisper.flac
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/10. A Rush Of Blood To The Head.flac
Coldplay/A Rush Of Blood To The Head/11. Amsterdam.flac
sent 180,981 bytes received 1,353 bytes 364,668.00 bytes/sec
total size is 41,185,457,595 speedup is 225,879.20 (DRY RUN)
This is the rsync command I am currently playing with. I wish rsync would give me better feedback than this. I would like to know how many files were copied and which files went from A to B as well as which files went from B to A. I am positive that the song clocks above was not on my sd card, I couldn't find it when I would look for in on my iBasso and I just validated that it is on in my music library and not on my sd card via the graphical search button on my file browser. I don't see anything bad standing ...
I think you've battled this before. My encounters with this has always been problems with filenames that are OK on the server but not allowed on FAT32. To sort this out I have to find a title that didn't sync and then see if some FAT32 rule was broken.
TL;DR The line PermitRootLogin yes does not belong in the ssh_config file, only in the sshd_config file.
The file ssh_config describes the configuration options for the client. As the error logs say, there is no such option PermitRootLogin for the client. The sshd_config file however, describes the options for the daemon. (You can recognise this because of sshd) The server/daemon does have a PermitRootLogin option, so it belongs there.
I have recently discovered that my music directory and the micro sd card that's in my hand held media player (iBasso DX50) are not in sync, I don't have any idea how that could have happened. There are songs in both my music directory that are that are not on the sd card as well as a few songs that are on my sd card that are not in my music library. I've always used rsync either directly or through the program LuckBackup to keep everything in sync so again I don't know how this could have happened. Note that my music library is ext4 and my sd card is fat32. What should my rsync command look like to make both of these directories mirror each other with nothing deleted on either end? I know I could google this but it's my music library, I'm very carful with it and I would feel better with a human being holding my hand here. Also I haven't been using Linux as my primary OS for a while now, every since by SSD got corrupted :(
I recently purchased Terra-Master F4-220 but I can not sign in via ssh. I thing is I don't think it's on the TM end, I think it's on my debian server's end. When I do try and connect this is what I get.
/etc/ssh/ssh_config: line 55: Bad configuration option: permitrootlogin
/etc/ssh/ssh_config: line 55: Bad configuration option: allowusers
/etc/ssh/ssh_config: terminating, 2 bad configuration options
Here is a sample of the tail end of the /etc/ssh/ssh_config file.
AllowUsers root garrett media plex rsync
Any ideas as to what the problem could be. I purchased the TM becaue I thought it would be easier to maintain my movies and tv shows media server than the headless debian server I built and am currently using. The TM can install Plex and DLNA with just a click. All I am trying to do is copy the movies files currently store on my debian server to the TM. Thanks for any help.
I think people are coming from all sectors appreciating Linux's uniqueness. Almost every software developer has a version of Linux software. Or at least there is WINE, to get it done. I am recently using a brand new IDE named JCppEdit, which is less popular because it is new in the market. And I was surprised to see that you can run it on Linux too! I found it interesting. People know an OS is the choice of your lifetime. But the applications, are not.
As a matter of fact, I don't want Linux to become as popular as Win. This way malware will remain at a low level. Being a low target goes to the benefit of the Linux users. Taking the effort to create malware is much more profitable with a large target like Win users. That also applies to the flooding of unwanted ads.
We welcome new users, especially the ones who are willing to put in the initial effort to learn to get around the the OS to get maximum benefits from it. These new users make it interesting for us to give them the boost to get up and running as soon as possible. All the learning tools and free help is available, on demand, by people who are willing to share their hard earned knowledge.
Also, there are versions of Linux that hide the background, sets itself up automatically, and can be run right out of the box.An example is Apple. It is a Posix Compliant Unix-Like OS. The GUI has been designed to hide that fact. Some are made to resemble Windows, for people who are Windows "bound". Really, there is something for everyone. It is not just a one version fits all people. Au contraire, different developers have tailored the OS to fit their idea of nice, then released it to the wild. There is no constricting boundaries. A user with enough knowledge, if he doesn't like the version that he/she is using, is not restricted to ...
The thing is, the difficulty gets wiped away as the knowledge keeps on coming in.
Most people who drive a car don't know the mechanics of how it works and most don't need, or care to know. That's most computer users. My point is that the knowledge/skills required to be an effective Linux user is beyond the capability of most users. For most people a computer is an appliance.
Anything is difficult when newly challenged by it.
Yeah. But Linux is the gift that keeps on giving. How many GUIs can you choose from now? Last I looked there was Unity, KDE and Gnome. Any more? Yes, I realize that with each new version of Windows they change where everything is located. It's my major complaint with MS. Hopefully things will settle down with the new paradigm.
Every day, these choices just keep on getting better.
And more varied, thus adding to the confusion. I think Emo Philips was a prophet.
Having said all that, you may get the impression that I really don't like Linux. On the contrary, I think it is a remarkable achievement. The value is outstanding for the cost and its capabilities and almost infinite configurability are remarkable. And for a certain small segment of the public it is far better than Windows. But for the rest, it is not.
most is still true, I read the same on forums for years, about people changing system every month like scarves, but I suspect it comes only from those which have time to waste. I have never had to put my hands on kernel, to be honest I don't even know from where to start. I use Ubuntu because it's different from other distros, which I agree are not friendly with new users, but Ubuntu is easy to install and configure, it's all graphical and supports a lot of hardware.
You can always open the terminal and compile a source if needed, most of the time it's easy, but not always because it happens that you have to find which library satisfies an obscure dependency but it's rare that an average user will ever need that software. I bought the laptop from which I'm writing in 2008, installed and never formatted. I do upgrades to follow the LTS (Long Time Support) versions which are supported for 5 years, now I'm on 16.04. Yes, I don't get the edgy versions of softwares but I gain in stability. I do reboots only because systemd, the new process manager, in practice an equivalent of your svchost.exe, sometimes requires to reboot the machine after an update (sigh), but otherwise I don't even need to do it for weeks.
True, Linux is not Windows. It's setup is totally different. Win is sitting on a database that must be refreshed when some things are changed. Thus, a reboot. Linux is different. When a change is made, exceptional cases may require a reboot. Otherwise, just make the change, and keep on trucking on what you were doing.
Anything is difficult when newly challenged by it. Be it learning to drive a car, fly a plane, learn a new subject in school... The thing is, the difficulty gets wiped away as the knowledge keeps on coming in. Once a topic is mastered, there is no difficulty. It's gone. The learning curve has been wiped away.
When Linux was first introduced, it was a large learning curve. No drivers for peripherals. Assembly required. And so on... But as time went on, people kept on learning. New innovations were introduced. Things got constantly improved. Now up to today. Linux, it's true, has grown into quite a sophisticated Operating System. It has also grown to the point, that most distros are self installing, and ready to run.
Many only have to be installed only once. And from that point, updates, error corrections, new innovations, come in automatically as they have been proofed, and ready to use. No periodical new installations need be done. For people who prefer a fresh new install once-in-a-while, that's also available.
Let's just say that with Linux, there is enough variety of choices to satisfy everyone's needs. The purists have choices. ...
Yes. Windows is more susceptible to malware, etc. than Linux. Then again, Linux is much more difficult to use and maintain for the vast majority of computer users. The majority of people I know with computers use Windows. The only ones who use Linux are the hardcore techies. You know them. They are the ones who recompile the kernel every six months. At several points over the last couple of decades I had considered making the switch but I always came back to Windows because Linux was just too damn much trouble.
There is a (rude word)-ton of non-techie information and help available to everyone on using Windows. In my experience, the skill set required to set up, configure, use and maintain a Linux system is just beyond most users and the information that is available is usually incomplete, assuming knowledge that most people just don't have. What is easier for most users who want to install and use a program?
Double click on the installer and follow the menus
Figure out some complex and arcane command line with equally cryptic arguments and switches
The first time I tried I couldn't get the wireless to work. After browsing many forums I finally found one of those command line thingies to install a missing driver (that should have been included in the distro). Even then it didn't work because "everyone knows that to make it work you have to...".
I will likely get many replies about how everything is ...
From my viewpoint, I seem to perceive that the BSD OS's seem to be the least targeted for malware. Perhaps because of their even lower footprint spread than Linux, or they have a tendency to be much more hardened than the Linux's. I believe that they have a much tighter structure than the Linux OS's. But that also lends itself to less flexibility.
Reverend Jim, Windows is much more susceptible to malware and virus attacks than Linux. Yes, you can harden your MS system against them, but the design of Linux makes such attacks much more rare, unless you are an idiot and leave your system open to remote access. Usually, web services are the most accessible to outside stuff. I managed something like 5000 servers for Nokia Mobile Phones, and we had zero intrusions! And we had 100 million remote customers all over the world. There was work involved to accomplish that, but with proper system monitoring we were able to detect when some asshat would be trying to penetrate the system. Let's just say that their #######s were a bit puckered when we were done with them!
Over the years, I had been hit many times in Windows, and I fixed it. It's just that the last time was it!
And you never considered that perhaps the problem was with you? It seems to me that the fault lay with you not taking proper precautions, following unsafe practices, etc. I've set up many systems for friends & relatives and only one system ever got infected by malware. That one was because my father-in-law repeatedly downloads and installs every "free" game on the internet. In his case I have a pre-borking image saved so after each borking I just slap on the image, apply outstanding updates and take a new image. Installing Unchecky has really helped.
I didn't usually have to purchase applications for some of the Win bound appliances, The drivers were either provided by the vendor, or downloadable, free, via the Internet. It's just that the appliances were designed to be run only using Windows, if updates or changes had to be made.
Considering that Linux is "generally" not a commercial product (Red Hat Linux is an exception), companies usually didn't want to produce and support free Linux drivers for their over the counter commercial products. There was no money in it for them. But now, Linux has acquired many worldwide developers with lots of knowledge, who know how to produce drivers for commercial appliances. Reliance on Windows drivers is no longer necessary. Linux coders are able to produce the same results as proprietary commercial drivers (without violating patents) by writing the application in a different manner. And of course, some companies were more generous than others, and decided to provide proprietary drivers for supporting their products. They realized that doing that would produce more sales for their products, whereas their competition was shunning the Linux market, and losing sales.
Over the years, I had been hit many times in Windows, and I fixed it. It's just that the last time was it! It was the last straw. I only kept Windows running because some applications needed to be upgraded once in a while, such as Tomtom gps, printers, and other gadgets, and those appliances only accept Windows for upgrading. But now for printers, Linux has their own drivers. It was no longer worth the Win maintenance effort. So I made a decision to stick with the OS with the best reliability score. I saved a lot of money not having to purchase Win applications. I saved a lot of frustration, not having to contend with being flooded with ads and popups in my browser, while simply trying to read some article in my browser. The Linux or BSD world is much gentler to cope with, and much easier on the pocketbook.
Having had to deal with both worlds, I've made my choice. I've followed both OS's paths from their inceptions, as they matured. It's been an interesting trip. But now, no more being an OS mechanic. Time to relax.