Semi-off-topic:
Bashisms are devil's work. If possible, I try to write "portable"
scripts avoiding anything way-too-non-POSIX, but since I usually don't
waste my time with broken file manager GUIs and instead use command
line, I'm in favour of bashisms for this purpose. Some folks prefer C
alike s
On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 00:21 +0200, Ángel wrote:
> Rather than adding a check after every command, I would recommend simply
> adding a call to set -e
#!/bin/bash -e
or what ever else, I only wanted to point out that a backup script
should be safe and somehow be able to either resolve issues or to
If you could share the killer message, it would be useful so that
whatever bug it is triggering can be fixed
(assuming it's not already fixed on a newer version, as you didn't state
your evolution version)
Best regards
___
evolution-list mailing list
ev
Yes, a rename in the same partition should be atomic.
Rather than adding a check after every command, I would recommend simply
adding a call to set -e
and rather than those repeated lines, it can be done with a simple loop:
for i in {5..2}; do
rm -f /mnt/tank/users/michelle/backup/mail/$i.tar.g
>> mv /mnt/tank/users/michelle/backup/mail/4.tar.gz
>> /mnt/tank/users/michelle/backup/mail/5.tar.gz
PPS:
Without doing a strace or using google, IIRC a 'mv' done within a
partitions, is an atomic operation. This doesn't mean that a '&&' alike
approach is _not_ better than just a ';' (';' is for
Perhaps. I shall take a look there - thanks for the pointer.
Not asked in my prior note, but something of interest (to me, anyway) is
whether OTHERS see the same behavior as I. That is, say, setting an
individual calendar's color to blue (#ff) and seeing if the text is
black (when it sh
PS
>evolution-backup-Message
Ok, removing '.running' might be something done by 'evolution-backup',
not by your script. My bad.
So to avoid confusion, the following applies:
On Sun, 02 Jun 2019 11:08:37 +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 09:14 +0100, Michelle via evolution
On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 09:14 +0100, Michelle via evolution-list wrote:
> Upgraded my version of Mint, which has...
> Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
>
> Prior to upgrading Linux Mint, my evolution backup script contained
the
> following...
>
> #!/bin/sh
> export DISPLAY=:0.0
> rm /mnt/tank/users
Thank you all.
Initially, I was using the --restart option when calling evolution-
backup so I would have assumed that it would have its own internal
timing on this. I'll try issuing the evolution --quit command from a
terminal window and give evolution some time, and see what it does, as
per Ralf
On 02 Jun 2019 12:55:00 +0200, Michael Hirmke wrote:
>_me=$( basename $0 )
>EVOL="evolution"
>
>killevolution() {
> $EVOL --force-shutdown
> sleep 1
> _pid=""
> _pid=$( \
> /usr/bin/ps -wwfe \
>| grep -i "${EVOL}" \
>| grep -v "grep" \
>| grep -v "${_me}" \
>| grep "^${USER}" \
> killall --wait foo &&
Don't get me wrong, I do _not_ recommend to use a killall SIGTERM over
an app's option for a "soft" shut down of the app.
As a user we might not know what processes to SIGTERM and in which
order, while the developers of an app do know this. IOW a SIGTERM isn't
as evil as
Hi Michelle,
>Upgraded my version of Mint, which has...
>Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
>Prior to upgrading Linux Mint, my evolution backup script contained the
>following...
[...]
>So evolution-backup is reporting the "quit" to evolution, but it
>doesn't appear to be listening. Also, there
> I've tried dropping to a command prompt and just issuing...
> evolution --quit
You shouldn't expect that such a friendly termination, even not if you
would kill via SIGTERM, does stopp the app running immediately, such
commands are intended to allow the app to terminate properly.
If you "please
On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 09:14 +0100, Michelle via evolution-list wrote:
> Upgraded my version of Mint, which has...
> Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
>
> Prior to upgrading Linux Mint, my evolution backup script contained
> the
> following...
>
> #!/bin/sh
> export DISPLAY=:0.0
> rm /mnt/tank/users
On Sat, 2019-06-01 at 19:55 -0500, Richard F. Gilette P.E. wrote:
> I can't find where the inbox emails are stored, I tried all the hints
> from thr web, and a lot of HD searches.
You could take a look at the user docs:
https://help.gnome.org/users/evolution/stable/data-storage.html
But that's no
On Sun, 2019-06-02 at 09:14 +0100, Michelle via evolution-list wrote:
> Any advice please?
I doubt that anyone can give useful feedback without seeing the entire
backup script. Quoting parts of it is not useful.
poc
___
evolution-list mailing list
evol
On Sat, 2019-06-01 at 15:03 -0400, AtomicCanine via evolution-list
wrote:
> Is there something else happening here I'm missing?
This might be more appropriate on the Evolutions Hackers lsit.
poc
___
evolution-list mailing list
evolution-list@gnome.org
Upgraded my version of Mint, which has...
Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.1
Prior to upgrading Linux Mint, my evolution backup script contained the
following...
#!/bin/sh
export DISPLAY=:0.0
rm /mnt/tank/users/michelle/backup/mail/5.tar.gz
mv /mnt/tank/users/michelle/backup/mail/4.tar.gz
/mnt/tan
18 matches
Mail list logo
