Hi all -
The short version of my problem is I need help with a recursive bash script, and I
have never written a bash script before. If you want to skip this lengthy intro, you
may be able to tell what I am trying to do from looking at my script attempt (labeled
below).
* * * * * * Lengthy
Larry Ozeran said:
Hi all -
The short version of my problem is I need help with a recursive bash
script, and I have never written a bash script before. If you want to skip
this lengthy intro, you may be able to tell what I am trying to do from
looking at my script attempt (labeled below).
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Larry Ozeran wrote:
Hi all -
[...]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailman]# rm -f error.*
bash: /bin/rm: Argument list too long
[...]
The idea is that if it can't erase all files error.1* because there are too many,
it calls itself again and tries error.1.1*, and so forth.
Hi all,
I made a bootable CD using the DOS that comes with Windows 95. It's
the kind of DOS that says Starting Windows 95 at boot time.
I tried to run the executable that should upgrade the BIOS, but got the
message:
A:\ bios_6bx.exe
This program must be run under Win32.
Can someone
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 07:05:52AM -0700, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
Hi all,
I made a bootable CD using the DOS that comes with Windows 95. It's
the kind of DOS that says Starting Windows 95 at boot time.
I tried to run the executable that should upgrade the BIOS, but got the
message:
On Wed 28 Apr 04, 8:23 AM, Ken Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 07:05:52AM -0700, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
Hi all,
I made a bootable CD using the DOS that comes with Windows 95. It's
the kind of DOS that says Starting Windows 95 at boot time.
I tried to run
Some larger hard drives (IBM deskstars at least) have a jumper to reduce
their capacity so that they can be used with an older BIOS. If you can live
with less than 64GB then this may be an easier solution.
Regards...
...leo
At 07:05 AM 4/28/04, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
Hi all,
I made
u...you can have my wife's olds pc. Pentium 2 and rock solid.
- Original Message -
From: Peter Jay Salzman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 8:43 AM
Subject: Re: [vox-tech] floppy madness
On Wed 28 Apr 04, 8:23 AM, Ken Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Interestingly, self-extracting zip files *will* unzip using a standard
unzip program. Unzip searches for the zip header, and unzips starting
from the header:
$ file wiz502xN.exe
wiz502xN.exe: MS-DOS executable (EXE), OS/2 or MS Windows
$ unzip wiz502xN.exe
Archive: wiz502xN.exe
If your wife wants windows 95, I have an old cd with key that can be booted
and installed by the cd rom. I have installed windows so many times I know
it almost by heart. If she doesn't want 95 I have 98 (both versions)
that's just the same.
You can have them so it can be all legal beagle.
hi jim,
well, i got my wish.
i was finally able to run the BIOS update utility. it appeared to work
and checksummed ok.
but now the system is hosed. the CPUs register as overheated the
second BIOS starts to post and the heat warning alarm comes on
immediately. can't boot off the cdrom
On Wed, 2004-04-28 at 10:38, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
i was finally able to run the BIOS update utility. it appeared to work
and checksummed ok.
but now the system is hosed.
I've worked with a few motherboards that had a bios reset jumper which
would auto flash the original, factory
ME wrote:
Consider another direction:
$ find /var/log -iname \*.[0-9].[0-9] -print0 | xargs -r0 rm -f
i agree, find is recursive by nature. no need to account for recursion
with a script. question: how does piping ot xargs differ from using
the -exec switch of find?
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 11:14:14AM -0700, Dave Margolis wrote:
i agree, find is recursive by nature. no need to account for recursion
with a script. question: how does piping ot xargs differ from using
the -exec switch of find?
Say you had files deleteme, metoo and imouttahere
find .
hi!
(B
(Bwe have a huge (50+ GB) Oracle database that is used for pesticide
(Breporting data in the state of california. all updates are delivered to us
(Bin the form of 'oracle database dumps' (not exactly sure what that
(Bmean...). all of the queries are usually quite simple, no use of
Hi Dylan,
(B
(B we are looking at converting our operations to MySQL, or any other open
(B source RDBMS...
(B
(BHave you considered postgres (please insert holy war here)? You'll get
(Bsupport for some extra features like triggers, stored procedures, etc...
(B
(BThere are tools to help
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 12:24:14PM -0700, Dave Margolis wrote:
great explaination, gracias. is there ever a chance that the set of
information piped off to xargs could become too big?
Nope! That's the nice thing about xargs. Notice how you're piping into
xargs. It just reads from stdin,
I would think that PostgreSQL may be a better choice. I started using
SQL-Ledger this week and it supports these three databases: Oracle, DB2,
and
PostgreSQL; I guess that could be viewed as a hint that Oracle and
PostgreSQL are more compatible than say MySQL and Oracle. Also, the
Dave Margolis said:
Bill Kendrick wrote:
Say you had files deleteme, metoo and imouttahere
find . -type f -exec rm {} \;
would cause this to happen:
rm deleteme
rm metoo
rm imouttahere
whereas the xargs method:
find . -type f | xargs rm
would cause this:
rm deleteme metoo
Hey All!
A debate has broken out here at my company between several of the engineers,
and I'm writing to see what you guys think.
Let me outline the problem... Our operation runs accross 11 redhat 9 servers
right now, and 3 more are coming. We're in 4 datacenters (though we only
have one server
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 02:16:54PM -0700, Jonathan wrote:
snip
So, one school here says set up a secure Open LDAP directory of some sort,
and use that as a replacement for /etc/password. Shockingly, the guy who is
espousing this position is from Netscape originally. Hehe.
snip
Along with
Dylan, Definitely Postgres.
You may not need the functionality now, but you may want it in the
future.
BTW, I am new to the group...just signed-up yesterday. You all are very
nice to each other...I am soo impressed.
I have been a DBA/architect for last several years with a giant evil
You're right MySQL is worthy of strong consideration. Their US headquarters are here
in Palo Alto and I think you'll find it to be a great choice. I started my career in
the database business over twenty years ago and have worked as a database tech, field
service for a major database vendor,
This is more of a question than an answer... but wouldn't NIS work?
From what I've read, it seems much easier than LDAP.
Message: 8
From: Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:16:54 -0700
Subject: [vox-tech] Easiest way to integrate the login of large
--- matthewlange [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dylan, Definitely Postgres.
You may not need the functionality now, but you may want it in the
future.
My $0.02:
Unless you really need the advanced features of Postgres, MySQL should do
everything you need it to do, and be a little more
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 04:55:33PM -0700, Jan W wrote:
Don't interpret this as knocking Postgres, I use it and think it's
great. It's just not a mature codebase the way that Oracle and other
RDBMS's are...
The Postgres codebase is very mature. It was around long before most of
the other
På onsdag, 28 april 2004, skrev [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
hi!
we have a huge (50+ GB) Oracle database that is used for pesticide
reporting data in the state of california. all updates are delivered to us
in the form of 'oracle database dumps' (not exactly sure what that
mean...). all of the
On Wednesday 28 April 2004 05:29 pm, David Hummel wrote:
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 04:55:33PM -0700, Jan W wrote:
Don't interpret this as knocking Postgres, I use it and think it's
great. It's just not a mature codebase the way that Oracle and other
RDBMS's are...
The Postgres codebase is
Thanks for the great discussion. I really appreciate everyone's ideas. Unfortunately,
it appears that find is using similar expansion of the * leading to the same error.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailman]# find -iname \erro*.[1-4].[1-4] -print0 | xargs -r0 rm -f
bash: /usr/bin/find: Argument list too
Why not just do the other way Foo suggested?:
find -iname \erro*.[1-4].[1-4] -exec rm -f \{} \;
-Mark?
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004, Larry Ozeran wrote:
Thanks for the great discussion. I really appreciate everyone's ideas.
Unfortunately, it appears that find is using similar expansion of the *
On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 10:33:13PM -0700, Larry Ozeran wrote:
Thanks for the great discussion. I really appreciate everyone's ideas.
Unfortunately, it appears that find is using similar expansion of the * leading to
the same error.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailman]# find -iname \erro*.[1-4].[1-4]
31 matches
Mail list logo
