Re: [PLUG] incron issue
I think I got my testing script working. It is a one-liner which reports clocktime, file time, and file name. It turns out that if I use IN_ALL_EVENTS without using IN_NO_LOOP, the maximum time between events is 2.5 seconds. If I include IN_NO_LOOP the maximum time goes to 4.6 seconds. I see no reason why these times would be shorter when I use IN_CLOSE_WRITE, as intended. This is for one application with what I judge to be a large print file. I need to explore other applications and files to see if this is worst case. Your time of 3 x 2 seconds should easily cover it if I do not find a worse application/file. -Denis On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:38 PM, Tomas Kuchta wrote: > My sample code works like this in principle: > > 1. You said 4-ish invocations per print file. That means that there would > be 4-ish instances of your script running, if I would not use that lock > file in /tmp to detect that another script instance is already dealing with > the print file. So, the script starts, looks for another script's lock > file, if it doesn't find one , it creates own one, waits a bit, checks > again, and if there is no collision (imagine multiple scripts checking and > creating locks at the same time) it waits for the print file to become > stable. > 2. The print file is considered stable if it is not changed for the > duration of 3 (I believe) 1 second wait loops. If the file changes, the > loop counter resets and another 3 set of loops goes by. This way, you do > not have to wait for the max possible print time, every time. I imagine > that long or complex document might take long time to print - if we know > that the printing application updates the file at least every few seconds - > we reset the timer at every change, re-starting the count down. > 3. File gets sent to a printer when it is considered stable, and then moved > to a backup dir under new name consisting of a time stamp + the original > name. If something goes wrong you can re-print manually. Backed up files > should sort by its date stamp. > 4. On exit, the script removes the lock file. > > That's about allif I remember correctly. > > I guess, you could call that lock file a semafor if that sounds better. > Alternatively, you could also look for another process instead of keeping > the lock/semafor file, but that would not allow for multiple files printing > correctly at the same file. > > I hope that it is little clearer. > > -T > > > On Nov 21, 2017 7:12 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" > wrote: > > > Me looking at kernel software would be no more educational than me > reading > > about it in Greek. And I did not think I wanted to debug the spooler, > > whatever that is. > > > > So to get down to the essentials, using only IN_CLOSE_WRITE, I get four > > events (with this particular application printing). For a big print job > > the timespan from the first event to the last is 10 seconds. I can > explore > > my two other applications and come up with a maximum (probable) time. > Add > > a buffer to that and use that time as a delay prior to printing the file. > > That was my intended approach. > > > > As I understand your approach it is to check the time stamp for the file > in > > question, delay 2 seconds, then assume if no change has occurred, the > file > > is ready to print. Is this understanding correct? If so, this assumes > > that the driver/application changes the file more frequently than every 2 > > seconds. To explore that, I was trying to send the time to the log every > > time I got an icron invocation with the IN_ALL_EVENTS mask. Hence my use > > of that mask and trying to capture the time to the log. This, I hope, > > explains why I wanted to see the result of > $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log>, and the question of why no time > appears > > in the log. Notice that there are many cases in the log where $1 > appears > > to be a filename. > > > > -Denis > > > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Tomas Kuchta < > > tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Of course that you see some/many invocations without any file names > when > > > you trigger on all directory events. All sorts of of processes go by > all > > > sorts of directories all the time on modern desktop. Not all of them > look > > > at files. > > > > > > What your aim is, I believe/hope, to respond to print file write and > > close > > > - and send that file to a printer. Ideally deleting or backing that > file > > > away from the print dir. You want to do that reliably and without > > multiple > > > processes acting on any given file. > > > > > > If you want to debug print job spooler, I would suggest to do just > that. > > Do > > > exactly what you need to do, keep it simple, and expand from there. > > > > > > If you are curious about kernel interworks, I would suggest to start > > > looking at kernel documentation and source code - it is more systematic > > way > > > of learning. Unfortunately, I am not the right person to have > meaningful > >
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
Thanks for that explanation. It really helps. It is basically as I surmised, but I appreciate the details. On my attempts to understand the actions of the driver/application, I found that I had some errors in the paths I used in my test script. ($1 needed to be augmented with its full path.) Now I get the time stamps regularly. -Denis On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:38 PM, Tomas Kuchta wrote: > My sample code works like this in principle: > > 1. You said 4-ish invocations per print file. That means that there would > be 4-ish instances of your script running, if I would not use that lock > file in /tmp to detect that another script instance is already dealing with > the print file. So, the script starts, looks for another script's lock > file, if it doesn't find one , it creates own one, waits a bit, checks > again, and if there is no collision (imagine multiple scripts checking and > creating locks at the same time) it waits for the print file to become > stable. > 2. The print file is considered stable if it is not changed for the > duration of 3 (I believe) 1 second wait loops. If the file changes, the > loop counter resets and another 3 set of loops goes by. This way, you do > not have to wait for the max possible print time, every time. I imagine > that long or complex document might take long time to print - if we know > that the printing application updates the file at least every few seconds - > we reset the timer at every change, re-starting the count down. > 3. File gets sent to a printer when it is considered stable, and then moved > to a backup dir under new name consisting of a time stamp + the original > name. If something goes wrong you can re-print manually. Backed up files > should sort by its date stamp. > 4. On exit, the script removes the lock file. > > That's about allif I remember correctly. > > I guess, you could call that lock file a semafor if that sounds better. > Alternatively, you could also look for another process instead of keeping > the lock/semafor file, but that would not allow for multiple files printing > correctly at the same file. > > I hope that it is little clearer. > > -T > > > On Nov 21, 2017 7:12 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" > wrote: > > > Me looking at kernel software would be no more educational than me > reading > > about it in Greek. And I did not think I wanted to debug the spooler, > > whatever that is. > > > > So to get down to the essentials, using only IN_CLOSE_WRITE, I get four > > events (with this particular application printing). For a big print job > > the timespan from the first event to the last is 10 seconds. I can > explore > > my two other applications and come up with a maximum (probable) time. > Add > > a buffer to that and use that time as a delay prior to printing the file. > > That was my intended approach. > > > > As I understand your approach it is to check the time stamp for the file > in > > question, delay 2 seconds, then assume if no change has occurred, the > file > > is ready to print. Is this understanding correct? If so, this assumes > > that the driver/application changes the file more frequently than every 2 > > seconds. To explore that, I was trying to send the time to the log every > > time I got an icron invocation with the IN_ALL_EVENTS mask. Hence my use > > of that mask and trying to capture the time to the log. This, I hope, > > explains why I wanted to see the result of > $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log>, and the question of why no time > appears > > in the log. Notice that there are many cases in the log where $1 > appears > > to be a filename. > > > > -Denis > > > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Tomas Kuchta < > > tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Of course that you see some/many invocations without any file names > when > > > you trigger on all directory events. All sorts of of processes go by > all > > > sorts of directories all the time on modern desktop. Not all of them > look > > > at files. > > > > > > What your aim is, I believe/hope, to respond to print file write and > > close > > > - and send that file to a printer. Ideally deleting or backing that > file > > > away from the print dir. You want to do that reliably and without > > multiple > > > processes acting on any given file. > > > > > > If you want to debug print job spooler, I would suggest to do just > that. > > Do > > > exactly what you need to do, keep it simple, and expand from there. > > > > > > If you are curious about kernel interworks, I would suggest to start > > > looking at kernel documentation and source code - it is more systematic > > way > > > of learning. Unfortunately, I am not the right person to have > meaningful > > > conversation about kernel and VFS events/triggers. My knowledge is too > > > shallow for that. > > > > > > Good luck, > > > Tomas > > > > > > On Nov 21, 2017 9:44 AM, "Denis Heidtmann" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > It is fully my intention to use only IN_CLOSE_WRITE in the final > > versi
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
My sample code works like this in principle: 1. You said 4-ish invocations per print file. That means that there would be 4-ish instances of your script running, if I would not use that lock file in /tmp to detect that another script instance is already dealing with the print file. So, the script starts, looks for another script's lock file, if it doesn't find one , it creates own one, waits a bit, checks again, and if there is no collision (imagine multiple scripts checking and creating locks at the same time) it waits for the print file to become stable. 2. The print file is considered stable if it is not changed for the duration of 3 (I believe) 1 second wait loops. If the file changes, the loop counter resets and another 3 set of loops goes by. This way, you do not have to wait for the max possible print time, every time. I imagine that long or complex document might take long time to print - if we know that the printing application updates the file at least every few seconds - we reset the timer at every change, re-starting the count down. 3. File gets sent to a printer when it is considered stable, and then moved to a backup dir under new name consisting of a time stamp + the original name. If something goes wrong you can re-print manually. Backed up files should sort by its date stamp. 4. On exit, the script removes the lock file. That's about allif I remember correctly. I guess, you could call that lock file a semafor if that sounds better. Alternatively, you could also look for another process instead of keeping the lock/semafor file, but that would not allow for multiple files printing correctly at the same file. I hope that it is little clearer. -T On Nov 21, 2017 7:12 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" wrote: > Me looking at kernel software would be no more educational than me reading > about it in Greek. And I did not think I wanted to debug the spooler, > whatever that is. > > So to get down to the essentials, using only IN_CLOSE_WRITE, I get four > events (with this particular application printing). For a big print job > the timespan from the first event to the last is 10 seconds. I can explore > my two other applications and come up with a maximum (probable) time. Add > a buffer to that and use that time as a delay prior to printing the file. > That was my intended approach. > > As I understand your approach it is to check the time stamp for the file in > question, delay 2 seconds, then assume if no change has occurred, the file > is ready to print. Is this understanding correct? If so, this assumes > that the driver/application changes the file more frequently than every 2 > seconds. To explore that, I was trying to send the time to the log every > time I got an icron invocation with the IN_ALL_EVENTS mask. Hence my use > of that mask and trying to capture the time to the log. This, I hope, > explains why I wanted to see the result of $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log>, and the question of why no time appears > in the log. Notice that there are many cases in the log where $1 appears > to be a filename. > > -Denis > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Tomas Kuchta < > tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Of course that you see some/many invocations without any file names when > > you trigger on all directory events. All sorts of of processes go by all > > sorts of directories all the time on modern desktop. Not all of them look > > at files. > > > > What your aim is, I believe/hope, to respond to print file write and > close > > - and send that file to a printer. Ideally deleting or backing that file > > away from the print dir. You want to do that reliably and without > multiple > > processes acting on any given file. > > > > If you want to debug print job spooler, I would suggest to do just that. > Do > > exactly what you need to do, keep it simple, and expand from there. > > > > If you are curious about kernel interworks, I would suggest to start > > looking at kernel documentation and source code - it is more systematic > way > > of learning. Unfortunately, I am not the right person to have meaningful > > conversation about kernel and VFS events/triggers. My knowledge is too > > shallow for that. > > > > Good luck, > > Tomas > > > > On Nov 21, 2017 9:44 AM, "Denis Heidtmann" > > wrote: > > > > > It is fully my intention to use only IN_CLOSE_WRITE in the final > version. > > > I currently am using IN_ALL_EVENTS just to see what the print > > > driver/application is doing. In fact, when I first started working on > > this > > > I used just IN_CLOSE_WRITE and saw 4 invocations. That is what sent > me > > > exploring. > > > > > > Regarding what is in $1, I see what seems to me to indicate a file name > > in > > > $1 *sometimes*. Why only sometimes? Here is the test script: > > > #! /bin/bash > > > # test of incron > > > echo -n "time: $(stat -c '%Y' $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > > echo "test: $1 $2" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > > > > > I get perhaps 27
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
Me looking at kernel software would be no more educational than me reading about it in Greek. And I did not think I wanted to debug the spooler, whatever that is. So to get down to the essentials, using only IN_CLOSE_WRITE, I get four events (with this particular application printing). For a big print job the timespan from the first event to the last is 10 seconds. I can explore my two other applications and come up with a maximum (probable) time. Add a buffer to that and use that time as a delay prior to printing the file. That was my intended approach. As I understand your approach it is to check the time stamp for the file in question, delay 2 seconds, then assume if no change has occurred, the file is ready to print. Is this understanding correct? If so, this assumes that the driver/application changes the file more frequently than every 2 seconds. To explore that, I was trying to send the time to the log every time I got an icron invocation with the IN_ALL_EVENTS mask. Hence my use of that mask and trying to capture the time to the log. This, I hope, explains why I wanted to see the result of > /home/denis/incronlog.log>, and the question of why no time appears in the log. Notice that there are many cases in the log where $1 appears to be a filename. -Denis On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Tomas Kuchta wrote: > Of course that you see some/many invocations without any file names when > you trigger on all directory events. All sorts of of processes go by all > sorts of directories all the time on modern desktop. Not all of them look > at files. > > What your aim is, I believe/hope, to respond to print file write and close > - and send that file to a printer. Ideally deleting or backing that file > away from the print dir. You want to do that reliably and without multiple > processes acting on any given file. > > If you want to debug print job spooler, I would suggest to do just that. Do > exactly what you need to do, keep it simple, and expand from there. > > If you are curious about kernel interworks, I would suggest to start > looking at kernel documentation and source code - it is more systematic way > of learning. Unfortunately, I am not the right person to have meaningful > conversation about kernel and VFS events/triggers. My knowledge is too > shallow for that. > > Good luck, > Tomas > > On Nov 21, 2017 9:44 AM, "Denis Heidtmann" > wrote: > > > It is fully my intention to use only IN_CLOSE_WRITE in the final version. > > I currently am using IN_ALL_EVENTS just to see what the print > > driver/application is doing. In fact, when I first started working on > this > > I used just IN_CLOSE_WRITE and saw 4 invocations. That is what sent me > > exploring. > > > > Regarding what is in $1, I see what seems to me to indicate a file name > in > > $1 *sometimes*. Why only sometimes? Here is the test script: > > #! /bin/bash > > # test of incron > > echo -n "time: $(stat -c '%Y' $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > echo "test: $1 $2" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > > > I get perhaps 270 invocations with IN_ALL_EVENTS. A sampling shows some > > responses with the file name, but no times: > > > > test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR > > time: test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR > > time: test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR > > time: test: tst1.PLT IN_OPEN > > time: time: test: tst1.PLT IN_OPEN > > test: tst1.PLT IN_OPEN > > time: test: tst1.PLT IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE > > time: test: tst1.PLT IN_ACCESS > > time: test: tst1.PLT IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE > > time: time: test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR > > test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR > > time: test: tst1.PLT IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE > > > > There are a number of questions raised by this, but I expect that most > can > > be explained by the rapid multiple invocations. Does that also explain > the > > missing times? > > > > -Denis > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Tomas Kuchta < > > tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > $(some command) will simply execute the command and give return value. > > > > > > You do not see any time stamp because you are not giving stat a file. > $1, > > > in > > > your case, doesn't contain file name. > > > > > > I have asked or suggested before to only use IN_CLOSE_WRITE event. That > > is > > > what you want - run the script after the file/dir was written to and is > > > closed. Not the other times when you look at it or read the file with > > your > > > script. Taking those other events off should solve the multiple > > invocation > > > problem. > > > > > > I hope it helps, > > > Tomas > > > > > > > > > On Nov 20, 2017 5:54 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" > > > wrote: > > > > > > Working my way through the script, trying to understand the behavior. > > Here > > > is a simple test: > > > > > > #! /bin/bash > > > # test of incron > > > echo -n "time: $(stat -c '%Y' $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > > echo "test: $1 $2" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > > # sleep 10 > > > > > > It generates what I would expect when exe
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
Of course that you see some/many invocations without any file names when you trigger on all directory events. All sorts of of processes go by all sorts of directories all the time on modern desktop. Not all of them look at files. What your aim is, I believe/hope, to respond to print file write and close - and send that file to a printer. Ideally deleting or backing that file away from the print dir. You want to do that reliably and without multiple processes acting on any given file. If you want to debug print job spooler, I would suggest to do just that. Do exactly what you need to do, keep it simple, and expand from there. If you are curious about kernel interworks, I would suggest to start looking at kernel documentation and source code - it is more systematic way of learning. Unfortunately, I am not the right person to have meaningful conversation about kernel and VFS events/triggers. My knowledge is too shallow for that. Good luck, Tomas On Nov 21, 2017 9:44 AM, "Denis Heidtmann" wrote: > It is fully my intention to use only IN_CLOSE_WRITE in the final version. > I currently am using IN_ALL_EVENTS just to see what the print > driver/application is doing. In fact, when I first started working on this > I used just IN_CLOSE_WRITE and saw 4 invocations. That is what sent me > exploring. > > Regarding what is in $1, I see what seems to me to indicate a file name in > $1 *sometimes*. Why only sometimes? Here is the test script: > #! /bin/bash > # test of incron > echo -n "time: $(stat -c '%Y' $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > echo "test: $1 $2" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > I get perhaps 270 invocations with IN_ALL_EVENTS. A sampling shows some > responses with the file name, but no times: > > test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR > time: test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR > time: test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR > time: test: tst1.PLT IN_OPEN > time: time: test: tst1.PLT IN_OPEN > test: tst1.PLT IN_OPEN > time: test: tst1.PLT IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE > time: test: tst1.PLT IN_ACCESS > time: test: tst1.PLT IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE > time: time: test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR > test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR > time: test: tst1.PLT IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE > > There are a number of questions raised by this, but I expect that most can > be explained by the rapid multiple invocations. Does that also explain the > missing times? > > -Denis > > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Tomas Kuchta < > tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > $(some command) will simply execute the command and give return value. > > > > You do not see any time stamp because you are not giving stat a file. $1, > > in > > your case, doesn't contain file name. > > > > I have asked or suggested before to only use IN_CLOSE_WRITE event. That > is > > what you want - run the script after the file/dir was written to and is > > closed. Not the other times when you look at it or read the file with > your > > script. Taking those other events off should solve the multiple > invocation > > problem. > > > > I hope it helps, > > Tomas > > > > > > On Nov 20, 2017 5:54 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" > > wrote: > > > > Working my way through the script, trying to understand the behavior. > Here > > is a simple test: > > > > #! /bin/bash > > # test of incron > > echo -n "time: $(stat -c '%Y' $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > echo "test: $1 $2" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > # sleep 10 > > > > It generates what I would expect when executed from the command line: > > ~/scripts/intest.sh examples.desktop: > > time: 1464568514test: examples.desktop > > > > But when invoked by incron the line including the time is empty except > for > > the word "time:" The time value is absent. > > time: time: test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR > > test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR > > time: test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR > > time: test: IN_OPEN,IN_ISDIR > > time: test: IN_OPEN,IN_ISDIR > > etc. > > > > My knowledge of the use of $, (, ", ', and { is lacking, so I expect > > that is where the trouble lies. > > > > Is the problem obvious? > > > > Thanks, > > -Denis > > > > On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Tomas Kuchta < > > tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > The script I posted does its own locking, so that other copies would > know > > > that it is already running and what file it is serving. > > > > > > See the lock file being created, checked and removed. > > > > > > Tomas > > > > > > On Nov 19, 2017 9:10 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Your script has things in it that stretch my knowledge of Bash, so > > > > understanding what it does is difficult for me. > > > > > > > > I have no experience with file locking. Is this a standard protocol? > > > > Since the print file is created by a Windows print driver, I wonder > if > > > the > > > > locking which is described in the ubuntu docs is reliably applicable. > > > > > > > > This is likely a discussion that stretches what is reasonable to > > attempt > > > > via a forum, since I need considerabl
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
It is fully my intention to use only IN_CLOSE_WRITE in the final version. I currently am using IN_ALL_EVENTS just to see what the print driver/application is doing. In fact, when I first started working on this I used just IN_CLOSE_WRITE and saw 4 invocations. That is what sent me exploring. Regarding what is in $1, I see what seems to me to indicate a file name in $1 *sometimes*. Why only sometimes? Here is the test script: #! /bin/bash # test of incron echo -n "time: $(stat -c '%Y' $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log echo "test: $1 $2" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log I get perhaps 270 invocations with IN_ALL_EVENTS. A sampling shows some responses with the file name, but no times: test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR time: test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR time: test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR time: test: tst1.PLT IN_OPEN time: time: test: tst1.PLT IN_OPEN test: tst1.PLT IN_OPEN time: test: tst1.PLT IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE time: test: tst1.PLT IN_ACCESS time: test: tst1.PLT IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE time: time: test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR time: test: tst1.PLT IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE There are a number of questions raised by this, but I expect that most can be explained by the rapid multiple invocations. Does that also explain the missing times? -Denis On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Tomas Kuchta wrote: > $(some command) will simply execute the command and give return value. > > You do not see any time stamp because you are not giving stat a file. $1, > in > your case, doesn't contain file name. > > I have asked or suggested before to only use IN_CLOSE_WRITE event. That is > what you want - run the script after the file/dir was written to and is > closed. Not the other times when you look at it or read the file with your > script. Taking those other events off should solve the multiple invocation > problem. > > I hope it helps, > Tomas > > > On Nov 20, 2017 5:54 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" > wrote: > > Working my way through the script, trying to understand the behavior. Here > is a simple test: > > #! /bin/bash > # test of incron > echo -n "time: $(stat -c '%Y' $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > echo "test: $1 $2" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > # sleep 10 > > It generates what I would expect when executed from the command line: > ~/scripts/intest.sh examples.desktop: > time: 1464568514test: examples.desktop > > But when invoked by incron the line including the time is empty except for > the word "time:" The time value is absent. > time: time: test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR > test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR > time: test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR > time: test: IN_OPEN,IN_ISDIR > time: test: IN_OPEN,IN_ISDIR > etc. > > My knowledge of the use of $, (, ", ', and { is lacking, so I expect > that is where the trouble lies. > > Is the problem obvious? > > Thanks, > -Denis > > On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Tomas Kuchta < > tomas.kuchta.li...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > > The script I posted does its own locking, so that other copies would know > > that it is already running and what file it is serving. > > > > See the lock file being created, checked and removed. > > > > Tomas > > > > On Nov 19, 2017 9:10 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" > > wrote: > > > > > Your script has things in it that stretch my knowledge of Bash, so > > > understanding what it does is difficult for me. > > > > > > I have no experience with file locking. Is this a standard protocol? > > > Since the print file is created by a Windows print driver, I wonder if > > the > > > locking which is described in the ubuntu docs is reliably applicable. > > > > > > This is likely a discussion that stretches what is reasonable to > attempt > > > via a forum, since I need considerable education. > > > > > > I appreciate your efforts. I will play with it in an attempt to learn > > what > > > you are proposing, but do not be surprised if it takes me some time. > > > > > > -Denis > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Tom > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Denis, > > > > > > > > Try something like the script below. > > > > It uses a lock to detect its own invocation as well as multiple > > > > invocations of self. If it prints it backs up the printed file, so > you > > > > should not lose anything, should things go south. > > > > > > > > Note: I did not properly test it. So, give it good pass over and test > > > > it before calling it a day. As I said, it should not loose any print > > > > files and you should know if it prints. > > > > > > > > Please insert your own print command instead of the echo "" and > > > > redirect the output to a log file or /dev/null so it does not end up > > > > with incron. > > > > > > > > Beware of broken script lines by the email. > > > > > > > > I hope that it works as intended or as an example, > > > > Tomas > > > > > > > > #!/bin/bash > > > > ## > > > > # This command submits a file to print > > > > # It is triggered by incron and tries to > > > > # grac
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
$(some command) will simply execute the command and give return value. You do not see any time stamp because you are not giving stat a file. $1, in your case, doesn't contain file name. I have asked or suggested before to only use IN_CLOSE_WRITE event. That is what you want - run the script after the file/dir was written to and is closed. Not the other times when you look at it or read the file with your script. Taking those other events off should solve the multiple invocation problem. I hope it helps, Tomas On Nov 20, 2017 5:54 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" wrote: Working my way through the script, trying to understand the behavior. Here is a simple test: #! /bin/bash # test of incron echo -n "time: $(stat -c '%Y' $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log echo "test: $1 $2" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log # sleep 10 It generates what I would expect when executed from the command line: ~/scripts/intest.sh examples.desktop: time: 1464568514test: examples.desktop But when invoked by incron the line including the time is empty except for the word "time:" The time value is absent. time: time: test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR time: test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR time: test: IN_OPEN,IN_ISDIR time: test: IN_OPEN,IN_ISDIR etc. My knowledge of the use of $, (, ", ', and { is lacking, so I expect that is where the trouble lies. Is the problem obvious? Thanks, -Denis On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Tomas Kuchta wrote: > The script I posted does its own locking, so that other copies would know > that it is already running and what file it is serving. > > See the lock file being created, checked and removed. > > Tomas > > On Nov 19, 2017 9:10 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" > wrote: > > > Your script has things in it that stretch my knowledge of Bash, so > > understanding what it does is difficult for me. > > > > I have no experience with file locking. Is this a standard protocol? > > Since the print file is created by a Windows print driver, I wonder if > the > > locking which is described in the ubuntu docs is reliably applicable. > > > > This is likely a discussion that stretches what is reasonable to attempt > > via a forum, since I need considerable education. > > > > I appreciate your efforts. I will play with it in an attempt to learn > what > > you are proposing, but do not be surprised if it takes me some time. > > > > -Denis > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Tom > wrote: > > > > > Hi Denis, > > > > > > Try something like the script below. > > > It uses a lock to detect its own invocation as well as multiple > > > invocations of self. If it prints it backs up the printed file, so you > > > should not lose anything, should things go south. > > > > > > Note: I did not properly test it. So, give it good pass over and test > > > it before calling it a day. As I said, it should not loose any print > > > files and you should know if it prints. > > > > > > Please insert your own print command instead of the echo "" and > > > redirect the output to a log file or /dev/null so it does not end up > > > with incron. > > > > > > Beware of broken script lines by the email. > > > > > > I hope that it works as intended or as an example, > > > Tomas > > > > > > #!/bin/bash > > > ## > > > # This command submits a file to print > > > # It is triggered by incron and tries to > > > # gracefully deal with multiple incron invocations > > > # and waits for file to be closed by the > > > # print application. > > > # Example incron line: > > > # printDirToMonitor IN_CLOSE_WRITE submitPrinterJob.bash $# > > > ## > > > lockDir=/tmp/ > > > lockFileBaseName=/tmp/submitPrinterJob > > > thisPid=$$ > > > fileToPrint=$1 > > > printedFilesDir=/home/$USER/printedFilesDir > > > mkdir -p $printedFilesDir > > > > > > searchLockPattern="${lockFileBaseName}_${fileToPrint}_*.lock" > > > myLockFileName="${lockFileBaseName}_${fileToPrint}_${thisPid}.lock" > > > > > > # check if the file to print is still there > > > if [ -e $fileToPrint ]; then > > > # Check if another script is running and serving this file > > > # Issue lock if not > > > c=0 > > > while (( $c < 2 )); do > > > if [ ! -e $searchLockPattern ]; then > > > # Cannot see any other process'lock > > > touch $myLockFileName > > > else > > > # there is a lock > > > if [ ! -e $myLockFileName ]; then > > > # the lock is not mine --> exit without printing, > > > # make sure not to leave own lock, in case it take time to > > > # show up > > > rm -f $myLockFileName > > > exit 0 > > > fi > > > fi > > > # There should be a lock and mine --> do nothing , just wait > > > c=$(( $c + 1 )) > > > sleep 2 > > > done > > > # if I got here I got a lock --> send the file to printer > > > if [ ! -e $fileToPrint ]; then > > > echo "WARNING: File $fileToPrint disapeared" > > > else
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
Working my way through the script, trying to understand the behavior. Here is a simple test: #! /bin/bash # test of incron echo -n "time: $(stat -c '%Y' $1)" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log echo "test: $1 $2" >> /home/denis/incronlog.log # sleep 10 It generates what I would expect when executed from the command line: ~/scripts/intest.sh examples.desktop: time: 1464568514test: examples.desktop But when invoked by incron the line including the time is empty except for the word "time:" The time value is absent. time: time: test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR test: IN_CLOSE_NOWRITE,IN_ISDIR time: test: IN_ACCESS,IN_ISDIR time: test: IN_OPEN,IN_ISDIR time: test: IN_OPEN,IN_ISDIR etc. My knowledge of the use of $, (, ", ', and { is lacking, so I expect that is where the trouble lies. Is the problem obvious? Thanks, -Denis On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Tomas Kuchta wrote: > The script I posted does its own locking, so that other copies would know > that it is already running and what file it is serving. > > See the lock file being created, checked and removed. > > Tomas > > On Nov 19, 2017 9:10 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" > wrote: > > > Your script has things in it that stretch my knowledge of Bash, so > > understanding what it does is difficult for me. > > > > I have no experience with file locking. Is this a standard protocol? > > Since the print file is created by a Windows print driver, I wonder if > the > > locking which is described in the ubuntu docs is reliably applicable. > > > > This is likely a discussion that stretches what is reasonable to attempt > > via a forum, since I need considerable education. > > > > I appreciate your efforts. I will play with it in an attempt to learn > what > > you are proposing, but do not be surprised if it takes me some time. > > > > -Denis > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Tom > wrote: > > > > > Hi Denis, > > > > > > Try something like the script below. > > > It uses a lock to detect its own invocation as well as multiple > > > invocations of self. If it prints it backs up the printed file, so you > > > should not lose anything, should things go south. > > > > > > Note: I did not properly test it. So, give it good pass over and test > > > it before calling it a day. As I said, it should not loose any print > > > files and you should know if it prints. > > > > > > Please insert your own print command instead of the echo "" and > > > redirect the output to a log file or /dev/null so it does not end up > > > with incron. > > > > > > Beware of broken script lines by the email. > > > > > > I hope that it works as intended or as an example, > > > Tomas > > > > > > #!/bin/bash > > > ## > > > # This command submits a file to print > > > # It is triggered by incron and tries to > > > # gracefully deal with multiple incron invocations > > > # and waits for file to be closed by the > > > # print application. > > > # Example incron line: > > > # printDirToMonitor IN_CLOSE_WRITE submitPrinterJob.bash $# > > > ## > > > lockDir=/tmp/ > > > lockFileBaseName=/tmp/submitPrinterJob > > > thisPid=$$ > > > fileToPrint=$1 > > > printedFilesDir=/home/$USER/printedFilesDir > > > mkdir -p $printedFilesDir > > > > > > searchLockPattern="${lockFileBaseName}_${fileToPrint}_*.lock" > > > myLockFileName="${lockFileBaseName}_${fileToPrint}_${thisPid}.lock" > > > > > > # check if the file to print is still there > > > if [ -e $fileToPrint ]; then > > > # Check if another script is running and serving this file > > > # Issue lock if not > > > c=0 > > > while (( $c < 2 )); do > > > if [ ! -e $searchLockPattern ]; then > > > # Cannot see any other process'lock > > > touch $myLockFileName > > > else > > > # there is a lock > > > if [ ! -e $myLockFileName ]; then > > > # the lock is not mine --> exit without printing, > > > # make sure not to leave own lock, in case it take time to > > > # show up > > > rm -f $myLockFileName > > > exit 0 > > > fi > > > fi > > > # There should be a lock and mine --> do nothing , just wait > > > c=$(( $c + 1 )) > > > sleep 2 > > > done > > > # if I got here I got a lock --> send the file to printer > > > if [ ! -e $fileToPrint ]; then > > > echo "WARNING: File $fileToPrint disapeared" > > > else > > > echo "Printing file $fileToPrint" > > > # backing up and removing printed file > > > mv $fileToPrint $printedFilesDir > > > sleep 1 > > > # removing lock file > > > rm -f $myLockFileName > > > fi > > > fi > > > exit 0 > > > ## > > > > > > On Sat, 2017-11-18 at 15:01 -0800, Denis Heidtmann wrote: > > > > It turns out that the multiple file closings is at least partially > > > > attributable to the application, since another application had two > > > > closings > > > > rather than four. Using th
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
The script I posted does its own locking, so that other copies would know that it is already running and what file it is serving. See the lock file being created, checked and removed. Tomas On Nov 19, 2017 9:10 PM, "Denis Heidtmann" wrote: > Your script has things in it that stretch my knowledge of Bash, so > understanding what it does is difficult for me. > > I have no experience with file locking. Is this a standard protocol? > Since the print file is created by a Windows print driver, I wonder if the > locking which is described in the ubuntu docs is reliably applicable. > > This is likely a discussion that stretches what is reasonable to attempt > via a forum, since I need considerable education. > > I appreciate your efforts. I will play with it in an attempt to learn what > you are proposing, but do not be surprised if it takes me some time. > > -Denis > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Tom wrote: > > > Hi Denis, > > > > Try something like the script below. > > It uses a lock to detect its own invocation as well as multiple > > invocations of self. If it prints it backs up the printed file, so you > > should not lose anything, should things go south. > > > > Note: I did not properly test it. So, give it good pass over and test > > it before calling it a day. As I said, it should not loose any print > > files and you should know if it prints. > > > > Please insert your own print command instead of the echo "" and > > redirect the output to a log file or /dev/null so it does not end up > > with incron. > > > > Beware of broken script lines by the email. > > > > I hope that it works as intended or as an example, > > Tomas > > > > #!/bin/bash > > ## > > # This command submits a file to print > > # It is triggered by incron and tries to > > # gracefully deal with multiple incron invocations > > # and waits for file to be closed by the > > # print application. > > # Example incron line: > > # printDirToMonitor IN_CLOSE_WRITE submitPrinterJob.bash $# > > ## > > lockDir=/tmp/ > > lockFileBaseName=/tmp/submitPrinterJob > > thisPid=$$ > > fileToPrint=$1 > > printedFilesDir=/home/$USER/printedFilesDir > > mkdir -p $printedFilesDir > > > > searchLockPattern="${lockFileBaseName}_${fileToPrint}_*.lock" > > myLockFileName="${lockFileBaseName}_${fileToPrint}_${thisPid}.lock" > > > > # check if the file to print is still there > > if [ -e $fileToPrint ]; then > > # Check if another script is running and serving this file > > # Issue lock if not > > c=0 > > while (( $c < 2 )); do > > if [ ! -e $searchLockPattern ]; then > > # Cannot see any other process'lock > > touch $myLockFileName > > else > > # there is a lock > > if [ ! -e $myLockFileName ]; then > > # the lock is not mine --> exit without printing, > > # make sure not to leave own lock, in case it take time to > > # show up > > rm -f $myLockFileName > > exit 0 > > fi > > fi > > # There should be a lock and mine --> do nothing , just wait > > c=$(( $c + 1 )) > > sleep 2 > > done > > # if I got here I got a lock --> send the file to printer > > if [ ! -e $fileToPrint ]; then > > echo "WARNING: File $fileToPrint disapeared" > > else > > echo "Printing file $fileToPrint" > > # backing up and removing printed file > > mv $fileToPrint $printedFilesDir > > sleep 1 > > # removing lock file > > rm -f $myLockFileName > > fi > > fi > > exit 0 > > ## > > > > On Sat, 2017-11-18 at 15:01 -0800, Denis Heidtmann wrote: > > > It turns out that the multiple file closings is at least partially > > > attributable to the application, since another application had two > > > closings > > > rather than four. Using the application with the four closings I > > > tried > > > again with a much more complicated drawing. This slowed down the > > > writing > > > of the print file to 10 seconds. Those 10 seconds were taken up > > > mostly > > > between the first and second closing (4 sec.) and the third and > > > fourth (6 > > > sec.) I may need to put a delay at the start of my printing script > > > so it > > > does not try to print an incomplete file. > > > > > > An aside: The "masks" in the incrontab are separated by comas but no > > > spaces are allowed. > > > > > > Nothing turns out as simple as it appears initially. > > > > > > -Denis > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Tom > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I am glad you worked it out. Well done. > > > > > > > > Darn fast computers!! > > > > > > > > -T > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 18:04 -0800, Denis Heidtmann wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On the "Create": this convinces me that I should take up > > > > > drinking > > > > > coffee, > > > > > so some stronger brain stimulant. Dumb. > > > > > > > > > > On the multiple entries, I think the issue is
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
Your script has things in it that stretch my knowledge of Bash, so understanding what it does is difficult for me. I have no experience with file locking. Is this a standard protocol? Since the print file is created by a Windows print driver, I wonder if the locking which is described in the ubuntu docs is reliably applicable. This is likely a discussion that stretches what is reasonable to attempt via a forum, since I need considerable education. I appreciate your efforts. I will play with it in an attempt to learn what you are proposing, but do not be surprised if it takes me some time. -Denis On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Tom wrote: > Hi Denis, > > Try something like the script below. > It uses a lock to detect its own invocation as well as multiple > invocations of self. If it prints it backs up the printed file, so you > should not lose anything, should things go south. > > Note: I did not properly test it. So, give it good pass over and test > it before calling it a day. As I said, it should not loose any print > files and you should know if it prints. > > Please insert your own print command instead of the echo "" and > redirect the output to a log file or /dev/null so it does not end up > with incron. > > Beware of broken script lines by the email. > > I hope that it works as intended or as an example, > Tomas > > #!/bin/bash > ## > # This command submits a file to print > # It is triggered by incron and tries to > # gracefully deal with multiple incron invocations > # and waits for file to be closed by the > # print application. > # Example incron line: > # printDirToMonitor IN_CLOSE_WRITE submitPrinterJob.bash $# > ## > lockDir=/tmp/ > lockFileBaseName=/tmp/submitPrinterJob > thisPid=$$ > fileToPrint=$1 > printedFilesDir=/home/$USER/printedFilesDir > mkdir -p $printedFilesDir > > searchLockPattern="${lockFileBaseName}_${fileToPrint}_*.lock" > myLockFileName="${lockFileBaseName}_${fileToPrint}_${thisPid}.lock" > > # check if the file to print is still there > if [ -e $fileToPrint ]; then > # Check if another script is running and serving this file > # Issue lock if not > c=0 > while (( $c < 2 )); do > if [ ! -e $searchLockPattern ]; then > # Cannot see any other process'lock > touch $myLockFileName > else > # there is a lock > if [ ! -e $myLockFileName ]; then > # the lock is not mine --> exit without printing, > # make sure not to leave own lock, in case it take time to > # show up > rm -f $myLockFileName > exit 0 > fi > fi > # There should be a lock and mine --> do nothing , just wait > c=$(( $c + 1 )) > sleep 2 > done > # if I got here I got a lock --> send the file to printer > if [ ! -e $fileToPrint ]; then > echo "WARNING: File $fileToPrint disapeared" > else > echo "Printing file $fileToPrint" > # backing up and removing printed file > mv $fileToPrint $printedFilesDir > sleep 1 > # removing lock file > rm -f $myLockFileName > fi > fi > exit 0 > ## > > On Sat, 2017-11-18 at 15:01 -0800, Denis Heidtmann wrote: > > It turns out that the multiple file closings is at least partially > > attributable to the application, since another application had two > > closings > > rather than four. Using the application with the four closings I > > tried > > again with a much more complicated drawing. This slowed down the > > writing > > of the print file to 10 seconds. Those 10 seconds were taken up > > mostly > > between the first and second closing (4 sec.) and the third and > > fourth (6 > > sec.) I may need to put a delay at the start of my printing script > > so it > > does not try to print an incomplete file. > > > > An aside: The "masks" in the incrontab are separated by comas but no > > spaces are allowed. > > > > Nothing turns out as simple as it appears initially. > > > > -Denis > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Tom > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I am glad you worked it out. Well done. > > > > > > Darn fast computers!! > > > > > > -T > > > > > > On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 18:04 -0800, Denis Heidtmann wrote: > > > > > > > > On the "Create": this convinces me that I should take up > > > > drinking > > > > coffee, > > > > so some stronger brain stimulant. Dumb. > > > > > > > > On the multiple entries, I think the issue is that my test script > > > > is > > > > very > > > > short and fast. I added a sleep 10 and I get only one entry--the > > > > first > > > > one. Apparently the print driver (or the program calling it) > > > > closes > > > > the > > > > file multiple times. I added $% to the incrontab file and %2 to > > > > the > > > > script > > > > (but w/o the sleep in my script) I got: > > > > > > > > test1 create test23 IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > > > test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > > > test1 create test23.PLT IN
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
Hi Denis, Try something like the script below. It uses a lock to detect its own invocation as well as multiple invocations of self. If it prints it backs up the printed file, so you should not lose anything, should things go south. Note: I did not properly test it. So, give it good pass over and test it before calling it a day. As I said, it should not loose any print files and you should know if it prints. Please insert your own print command instead of the echo "" and redirect the output to a log file or /dev/null so it does not end up with incron. Beware of broken script lines by the email. I hope that it works as intended or as an example, Tomas #!/bin/bash ## # This command submits a file to print # It is triggered by incron and tries to # gracefully deal with multiple incron invocations # and waits for file to be closed by the # print application. # Example incron line: # printDirToMonitor IN_CLOSE_WRITE submitPrinterJob.bash $# ## lockDir=/tmp/ lockFileBaseName=/tmp/submitPrinterJob thisPid=$$ fileToPrint=$1 printedFilesDir=/home/$USER/printedFilesDir mkdir -p $printedFilesDir searchLockPattern="${lockFileBaseName}_${fileToPrint}_*.lock" myLockFileName="${lockFileBaseName}_${fileToPrint}_${thisPid}.lock" # check if the file to print is still there if [ -e $fileToPrint ]; then # Check if another script is running and serving this file # Issue lock if not c=0 while (( $c < 2 )); do if [ ! -e $searchLockPattern ]; then # Cannot see any other process'lock touch $myLockFileName else # there is a lock if [ ! -e $myLockFileName ]; then # the lock is not mine --> exit without printing, # make sure not to leave own lock, in case it take time to # show up rm -f $myLockFileName exit 0 fi fi # There should be a lock and mine --> do nothing , just wait c=$(( $c + 1 )) sleep 2 done # if I got here I got a lock --> send the file to printer if [ ! -e $fileToPrint ]; then echo "WARNING: File $fileToPrint disapeared" else echo "Printing file $fileToPrint" # backing up and removing printed file mv $fileToPrint $printedFilesDir sleep 1 # removing lock file rm -f $myLockFileName fi fi exit 0 ## On Sat, 2017-11-18 at 15:01 -0800, Denis Heidtmann wrote: > It turns out that the multiple file closings is at least partially > attributable to the application, since another application had two > closings > rather than four. Using the application with the four closings I > tried > again with a much more complicated drawing. This slowed down the > writing > of the print file to 10 seconds. Those 10 seconds were taken up > mostly > between the first and second closing (4 sec.) and the third and > fourth (6 > sec.) I may need to put a delay at the start of my printing script > so it > does not try to print an incomplete file. > > An aside: The "masks" in the incrontab are separated by comas but no > spaces are allowed. > > Nothing turns out as simple as it appears initially. > > -Denis > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Tom > wrote: > > > > > I am glad you worked it out. Well done. > > > > Darn fast computers!! > > > > -T > > > > On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 18:04 -0800, Denis Heidtmann wrote: > > > > > > On the "Create": this convinces me that I should take up > > > drinking > > > coffee, > > > so some stronger brain stimulant. Dumb. > > > > > > On the multiple entries, I think the issue is that my test script > > > is > > > very > > > short and fast. I added a sleep 10 and I get only one entry--the > > > first > > > one. Apparently the print driver (or the program calling it) > > > closes > > > the > > > file multiple times. I added $% to the incrontab file and %2 to > > > the > > > script > > > (but w/o the sleep in my script) I got: > > > > > > test1 create test23 IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > > test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > > test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > > test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > > > > > This behavior of the driver/application seems not the best, but > > > there > > > is > > > nothing to be done about it. I assume that my printing script > > > will > > > take > > > sufficient time it will not matter. > > > > > > I recorded the times associated with the four log entries. It > > > was > > > 347 msec > > > overall, with the last step taking most of this time at about 300 > > > msec. So > > > my anticipation that the multiple writes/closing will not matter > > > seems > > > reasonable. Let's hope so. > > > > > > Thanks again for the suggestion. > > > > > > -Denis > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Tomas Kuchta > > @gma > > > il.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I recall incron details correctly, you get multiple entries > > > > in > > > > your log > > > > because y
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
It turns out that the multiple file closings is at least partially attributable to the application, since another application had two closings rather than four. Using the application with the four closings I tried again with a much more complicated drawing. This slowed down the writing of the print file to 10 seconds. Those 10 seconds were taken up mostly between the first and second closing (4 sec.) and the third and fourth (6 sec.) I may need to put a delay at the start of my printing script so it does not try to print an incomplete file. An aside: The "masks" in the incrontab are separated by comas but no spaces are allowed. Nothing turns out as simple as it appears initially. -Denis On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Tom wrote: > I am glad you worked it out. Well done. > > Darn fast computers!! > > -T > > On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 18:04 -0800, Denis Heidtmann wrote: > > On the "Create": this convinces me that I should take up drinking > > coffee, > > so some stronger brain stimulant. Dumb. > > > > On the multiple entries, I think the issue is that my test script is > > very > > short and fast. I added a sleep 10 and I get only one entry--the > > first > > one. Apparently the print driver (or the program calling it) closes > > the > > file multiple times. I added $% to the incrontab file and %2 to the > > script > > (but w/o the sleep in my script) I got: > > > > test1 create test23 IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > > > This behavior of the driver/application seems not the best, but there > > is > > nothing to be done about it. I assume that my printing script will > > take > > sufficient time it will not matter. > > > > I recorded the times associated with the four log entries. It was > > 347 msec > > overall, with the last step taking most of this time at about 300 > > msec. So > > my anticipation that the multiple writes/closing will not matter > > seems > > reasonable. Let's hope so. > > > > Thanks again for the suggestion. > > > > -Denis > > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Tomas Kuchta > il.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > If I recall incron details correctly, you get multiple entries in > > > your log > > > because you run your script multiple times at different events: > > > IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_NO_LOOP > > > > > > Your other question: You see "create" in your log because that is > > > what your > > > echo command puts there in your script. > > > > > > -Tomas > > > > > > On Nov 17, 2017 11:47 AM, "Denis Heidtmann" > > com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > I have pursued Tomas' advice to use incron to automatically send > > > files > > > written by the win2k print driver to the printer. I have > > > everything down > > > to one issue. To test, I have a simple script (intest.sh) that > > > just sends > > > the event responded to to a log file: > > > > > > #! /bin/bash > > > # test of incron > > > echo "tes1 create " $1 >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > > > > > The incron table is: > > > > > > /home/denis/win2kfiles/Print_files IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_NO_LOOP > > > /home/denis/scripts/intest.sh $# > > > > > > The resulting log is: > > > > > > tes1 create test12 > > > tes1 create test12.PLT > > > tes1 create test12.PLT > > > tes1 create test12.PLT > > > > > > It generates multiple entries for one file added (i.e., one print > > > command). I added IN_ONESHOT to the incrontab: > > > > > > /home/denis/win2kfiles/Print_files > > > IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_ONESHOT,IN_NO_LOOP > > > /home/denis/scripts/intest.sh $# > > > > > > I still got multiple entries in the log. > > > > > > > > > Questions: > > > Why does the log not say "close" instead of "create"? > > > Why four entries? > > > What might the result be when the script intest.sh is replaced by > > > one that > > > prints and deletes the files? Will it be called 4 times in rapid > > > succession? > > > > > > Any suggestions for testing further? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -Denis > > > ___ > > > PLUG mailing list > > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > ___ > > > PLUG mailing list > > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > > > ___ > > PLUG mailing list > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
I am glad you worked it out. Well done. Darn fast computers!! -T On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 18:04 -0800, Denis Heidtmann wrote: > On the "Create": this convinces me that I should take up drinking > coffee, > so some stronger brain stimulant. Dumb. > > On the multiple entries, I think the issue is that my test script is > very > short and fast. I added a sleep 10 and I get only one entry--the > first > one. Apparently the print driver (or the program calling it) closes > the > file multiple times. I added $% to the incrontab file and %2 to the > script > (but w/o the sleep in my script) I got: > > test1 create test23 IN_CLOSE_WRITE > test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE > test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE > test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE > > This behavior of the driver/application seems not the best, but there > is > nothing to be done about it. I assume that my printing script will > take > sufficient time it will not matter. > > I recorded the times associated with the four log entries. It was > 347 msec > overall, with the last step taking most of this time at about 300 > msec. So > my anticipation that the multiple writes/closing will not matter > seems > reasonable. Let's hope so. > > Thanks again for the suggestion. > > -Denis > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Tomas Kuchta il.com> > wrote: > > > > > If I recall incron details correctly, you get multiple entries in > > your log > > because you run your script multiple times at different events: > > IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_NO_LOOP > > > > Your other question: You see "create" in your log because that is > > what your > > echo command puts there in your script. > > > > -Tomas > > > > On Nov 17, 2017 11:47 AM, "Denis Heidtmann" > com> > > wrote: > > > > I have pursued Tomas' advice to use incron to automatically send > > files > > written by the win2k print driver to the printer. I have > > everything down > > to one issue. To test, I have a simple script (intest.sh) that > > just sends > > the event responded to to a log file: > > > > #! /bin/bash > > # test of incron > > echo "tes1 create " $1 >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > > > The incron table is: > > > > /home/denis/win2kfiles/Print_files IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_NO_LOOP > > /home/denis/scripts/intest.sh $# > > > > The resulting log is: > > > > tes1 create test12 > > tes1 create test12.PLT > > tes1 create test12.PLT > > tes1 create test12.PLT > > > > It generates multiple entries for one file added (i.e., one print > > command). I added IN_ONESHOT to the incrontab: > > > > /home/denis/win2kfiles/Print_files > > IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_ONESHOT,IN_NO_LOOP > > /home/denis/scripts/intest.sh $# > > > > I still got multiple entries in the log. > > > > > > Questions: > > Why does the log not say "close" instead of "create"? > > Why four entries? > > What might the result be when the script intest.sh is replaced by > > one that > > prints and deletes the files? Will it be called 4 times in rapid > > succession? > > > > Any suggestions for testing further? > > > > Thanks, > > -Denis > > ___ > > PLUG mailing list > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > ___ > > PLUG mailing list > > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
On the "Create": this convinces me that I should take up drinking coffee, so some stronger brain stimulant. Dumb. On the multiple entries, I think the issue is that my test script is very short and fast. I added a sleep 10 and I get only one entry--the first one. Apparently the print driver (or the program calling it) closes the file multiple times. I added $% to the incrontab file and %2 to the script (but w/o the sleep in my script) I got: test1 create test23 IN_CLOSE_WRITE test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE test1 create test23.PLT IN_CLOSE_WRITE This behavior of the driver/application seems not the best, but there is nothing to be done about it. I assume that my printing script will take sufficient time it will not matter. I recorded the times associated with the four log entries. It was 347 msec overall, with the last step taking most of this time at about 300 msec. So my anticipation that the multiple writes/closing will not matter seems reasonable. Let's hope so. Thanks again for the suggestion. -Denis On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Tomas Kuchta wrote: > If I recall incron details correctly, you get multiple entries in your log > because you run your script multiple times at different events: > IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_NO_LOOP > > Your other question: You see "create" in your log because that is what your > echo command puts there in your script. > > -Tomas > > On Nov 17, 2017 11:47 AM, "Denis Heidtmann" > wrote: > > I have pursued Tomas' advice to use incron to automatically send files > written by the win2k print driver to the printer. I have everything down > to one issue. To test, I have a simple script (intest.sh) that just sends > the event responded to to a log file: > > #! /bin/bash > # test of incron > echo "tes1 create " $1 >> /home/denis/incronlog.log > > The incron table is: > > /home/denis/win2kfiles/Print_files IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_NO_LOOP > /home/denis/scripts/intest.sh $# > > The resulting log is: > > tes1 create test12 > tes1 create test12.PLT > tes1 create test12.PLT > tes1 create test12.PLT > > It generates multiple entries for one file added (i.e., one print > command). I added IN_ONESHOT to the incrontab: > > /home/denis/win2kfiles/Print_files IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_ONESHOT,IN_NO_LOOP > /home/denis/scripts/intest.sh $# > > I still got multiple entries in the log. > > > Questions: > Why does the log not say "close" instead of "create"? > Why four entries? > What might the result be when the script intest.sh is replaced by one that > prints and deletes the files? Will it be called 4 times in rapid > succession? > > Any suggestions for testing further? > > Thanks, > -Denis > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] incron issue
If I recall incron details correctly, you get multiple entries in your log because you run your script multiple times at different events: IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_NO_LOOP Your other question: You see "create" in your log because that is what your echo command puts there in your script. -Tomas On Nov 17, 2017 11:47 AM, "Denis Heidtmann" wrote: I have pursued Tomas' advice to use incron to automatically send files written by the win2k print driver to the printer. I have everything down to one issue. To test, I have a simple script (intest.sh) that just sends the event responded to to a log file: #! /bin/bash # test of incron echo "tes1 create " $1 >> /home/denis/incronlog.log The incron table is: /home/denis/win2kfiles/Print_files IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_NO_LOOP /home/denis/scripts/intest.sh $# The resulting log is: tes1 create test12 tes1 create test12.PLT tes1 create test12.PLT tes1 create test12.PLT It generates multiple entries for one file added (i.e., one print command). I added IN_ONESHOT to the incrontab: /home/denis/win2kfiles/Print_files IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_ONESHOT,IN_NO_LOOP /home/denis/scripts/intest.sh $# I still got multiple entries in the log. Questions: Why does the log not say "close" instead of "create"? Why four entries? What might the result be when the script intest.sh is replaced by one that prints and deletes the files? Will it be called 4 times in rapid succession? Any suggestions for testing further? Thanks, -Denis ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
[PLUG] incron issue
I have pursued Tomas' advice to use incron to automatically send files written by the win2k print driver to the printer. I have everything down to one issue. To test, I have a simple script (intest.sh) that just sends the event responded to to a log file: #! /bin/bash # test of incron echo "tes1 create " $1 >> /home/denis/incronlog.log The incron table is: /home/denis/win2kfiles/Print_files IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_NO_LOOP /home/denis/scripts/intest.sh $# The resulting log is: tes1 create test12 tes1 create test12.PLT tes1 create test12.PLT tes1 create test12.PLT It generates multiple entries for one file added (i.e., one print command). I added IN_ONESHOT to the incrontab: /home/denis/win2kfiles/Print_files IN_CLOSE_WRITE,IN_ONESHOT,IN_NO_LOOP /home/denis/scripts/intest.sh $# I still got multiple entries in the log. Questions: Why does the log not say "close" instead of "create"? Why four entries? What might the result be when the script intest.sh is replaced by one that prints and deletes the files? Will it be called 4 times in rapid succession? Any suggestions for testing further? Thanks, -Denis ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug