Re: No volumes in Linux?
> Ken Ray's proposal: > > Bob, here's how I do it with OSX's shell; perhaps this will work with Linux > as well (in this case I'm executing a 'kill' on a process with sudo): > > put "#!/bin/sh" & cr into tScript > put "pw="&tPassword & cr into tScript > put "echo $pw | sudo -S kill -9" && tProcessID & cr after tScript > get shell(tScript) > > Substituting an actual string for "tPassword" is OK, but to see whether this > might work under Linux I need to know what to put in place of "tProcessID". > Wossis? > Sorry about the ignorance factor on my part No problem... I was just giving you an example of how to pass authentication via shell using an example I had of killing a process. You're not killing a process, so everything that comes after "sudo" needs to be your own command, so you'd do: echo $pw | sudo sfdisk -s But you already have a workable solution, so this is just FYI... Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
Sorry about the delay in replying to all the kind (and very clever) folks who have taken an interest in listing the Linux volumes through the RR Shell command - not just the ones mentioned below! I had to give the kiss of life to my Hoary Hedgehog, and now he is running around again. Mark Waddington's solution was the one least likely to blow my beginner's mind, and it seems to have worked. On executing:- Put the shell of "mount" into .. - I get the following list on my Ubuntu Linux machine: /dev/hda1 on / type ext3 (rw,errors=remount-ro) proc on /proc type proc (rw) sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw) devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=5,mode=620) tmpfs on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw) /dev on /.dev type unknown (rw,bind) none on /dev type tmpfs (rw,size=5M,mode=0755) usbfs on /proc/bus/usb type usbfs (rw) /dev/hdc on /media/cdrom0 type iso9660 (ro,noexec,nosuid,nodev,user=bob) My HD and CD-Rom drives (volumes) are correctly reported in the first and last lines, and I can use these to extract the info I want. Thanks Mark! ''' Chris Kassopulo's proposal: For a list of all drives use: sudo sfdisk -s /dev/hda: 58652496 total: 58652496 blocks For a list of all partitions use: sudo sfdisk -l That's great info for a Linux novice. Thanks Chris! But of course it suffers the problem of root privileges elucidated by Mark when calling through the RR Shell. The result through the shell is a request to enter my password, but no info about the volumes. Ken Ray's proposal: Bob, here's how I do it with OSX's shell; perhaps this will work with Linux as well (in this case I'm executing a 'kill' on a process with sudo): put "#!/bin/sh" & cr into tScript put "pw="&tPassword & cr into tScript put "echo $pw | sudo -S kill -9" && tProcessID & cr after tScript get shell(tScript) Substituting an actual string for "tPassword" is OK, but to see whether this might work under Linux I need to know what to put in place of "tProcessID". Wossis? Sorry about the ignorance factor on my part ''' Xavier's (MisterX's) proposal: would this do it then? function GetLinuxvolumes includeUSB put includeUSB is true into includeUSB put url "File:/etc/mtab" into vlist if includeUSB then put vlist into usblist filter usblist with "*usb*" end if filter vlist with "*hda*" if includeUSB then put CR & usblist after vlist repeat for each line l in vlist get word 2 of l if it is not empty then put it & cr after drivelist end repeat delete last char of drivelist return drivelist end GetLinuxvolumes That looks promising! Thanks for the work! But it's horrible being an RR novice as well as a novice in Linux too. I don't know how to call this function, since its format seems a little different from the example function call given in the RR Help. It's the "includeUSB" bit that has me fogged, since the only buses I am used to taking usually end up in Piccadilly Circus! Would you be kind enough to give me an example of how to call this function? It may or may not work in Linux, but at least I will have learned something about calling functions! Thanks. ''' Thank you all once again. Best, Bob ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: No volumes in Linux?
would this do it then?
function GetLinuxvolumes includeUSB
put includeUSB is true into includeUSB
put url "File:/etc/mtab" into vlist
if includeUSB then
put vlist into usblist
filter usblist with "*usb*"
end if
filter vlist with "*hda*"
if includeUSB then put CR & usblist after vlist
repeat for each line l in vlist
get word 2 of l
if it is not empty then put it & cr after drivelist
end repeat
delete last char of drivelist
return drivelist
end GetLinuxvolumes
cheers
Xavier
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Mark Waddingham
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 12:14
> To: Bob Warren; How to use Revolution
> Subject: Re: No volumes in Linux?
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> The problem you are experiencing with the shell command stems
> from the fact you are trying to execute a super-user only
> command when Revolution is not running with super-user
> privileges. The shell command (as it
> stands) makes no attempt to authenticate or change the
> user-environment and so cannot be used to do this.
>
> However, in this case you have other options other than sfdisk :o)
>
> Whenever a device is mounted on linux, the record of this
> fact is recorded in '/etc/mtab' - this file contains a list
> of all currently mounted devices with various details. For
> example, right now, the mtab on one of my machines is:
>
> /dev/hda3 / ext3 rw 0 0
> none /proc proc rw 0 0
> none /sys sysfs rw 0 0
> none /dev/pts devpts rw,gid=5,mode=620 0 0 usbfs
> /proc/bus/usb usbfs rw 0 0
> /dev/hda1 /boot ext3 rw 0 0
> none /dev/shm tmpfs rw 0 0
> /dev/hda2 /home ext3 rw 0 0
> /dev/hda6 /systems/additional-1 ext3 rw 0 0
> /dev/hda7 /systems/additional-2 ext3 rw 0 0
> /dev/hda8 /systems/additional-3 ext3 rw 0 0
> /dev/hda9 /systems/additional-4 ext3 rw 0 0 /dev/hda10
> /systems/additional-5 ext3 rw 0 0
> /dev/hda11 /systems/additional-6 ext3 rw 0 0
> /dev/hda12 /systems/additional-7 ext3 rw 0 0
> /dev/hda5 /workspace ext3 rw 0 0
> none /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc binfmt_misc rw 0 0 sunrpc
> /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs rpc_pipefs rw 0 0
>
> The format here is:
>
>
> To the best of my knowledge '/etc/mtab' is always globally
> readable - but if not, the information can also be extracted
> by calling the 'mount'
> command via shell. Again, in my case when I do shell("mount") I get:
>
> /dev/hda3 on / type ext3 (rw)
> none on /proc type proc (rw)
> none on /sys type sysfs (rw)
> none on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=5,mode=620) usbfs on
> /proc/bus/usb type usbfs (rw)
> /dev/hda1 on /boot type ext3 (rw)
> none on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw)
> /dev/hda2 on /home type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/hda6 on /systems/additional-1 type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/hda7 on /systems/additional-2 type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/hda8 on /systems/additional-3 type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/hda9 on /systems/additional-4 type ext3 (rw) /dev/hda10
> on /systems/additional-5 type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/hda11 on /systems/additional-6 type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/hda12 on /systems/additional-7 type ext3 (rw)
> /dev/hda5 on /workspace type ext3 (rw)
> none on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type binfmt_misc (rw) sunrpc
> on /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs type rpc_pipefs (rw)
>
> Hope this helpes,
>
> Mark.
>
> --
> Mark Waddingham ~ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ http://www.runrev.com
>Runtime Revolution ~ User-Centric Development Tools
>
> ___
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
> your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
Hi Bob,
The problem you are experiencing with the shell command stems from the
fact you are trying to execute a super-user only command when Revolution
is not running with super-user privileges. The shell command (as it
stands) makes no attempt to authenticate or change the user-environment
and so cannot be used to do this.
However, in this case you have other options other than sfdisk :o)
Whenever a device is mounted on linux, the record of this fact is
recorded in '/etc/mtab' - this file contains a list of all currently
mounted devices with various details. For example, right now, the mtab
on one of my machines is:
/dev/hda3 / ext3 rw 0 0
none /proc proc rw 0 0
none /sys sysfs rw 0 0
none /dev/pts devpts rw,gid=5,mode=620 0 0
usbfs /proc/bus/usb usbfs rw 0 0
/dev/hda1 /boot ext3 rw 0 0
none /dev/shm tmpfs rw 0 0
/dev/hda2 /home ext3 rw 0 0
/dev/hda6 /systems/additional-1 ext3 rw 0 0
/dev/hda7 /systems/additional-2 ext3 rw 0 0
/dev/hda8 /systems/additional-3 ext3 rw 0 0
/dev/hda9 /systems/additional-4 ext3 rw 0 0
/dev/hda10 /systems/additional-5 ext3 rw 0 0
/dev/hda11 /systems/additional-6 ext3 rw 0 0
/dev/hda12 /systems/additional-7 ext3 rw 0 0
/dev/hda5 /workspace ext3 rw 0 0
none /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc binfmt_misc rw 0 0
sunrpc /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs rpc_pipefs rw 0 0
The format here is:
To the best of my knowledge '/etc/mtab' is always globally readable -
but if not, the information can also be extracted by calling the 'mount'
command via shell. Again, in my case when I do shell("mount") I get:
/dev/hda3 on / type ext3 (rw)
none on /proc type proc (rw)
none on /sys type sysfs (rw)
none on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=5,mode=620)
usbfs on /proc/bus/usb type usbfs (rw)
/dev/hda1 on /boot type ext3 (rw)
none on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw)
/dev/hda2 on /home type ext3 (rw)
/dev/hda6 on /systems/additional-1 type ext3 (rw)
/dev/hda7 on /systems/additional-2 type ext3 (rw)
/dev/hda8 on /systems/additional-3 type ext3 (rw)
/dev/hda9 on /systems/additional-4 type ext3 (rw)
/dev/hda10 on /systems/additional-5 type ext3 (rw)
/dev/hda11 on /systems/additional-6 type ext3 (rw)
/dev/hda12 on /systems/additional-7 type ext3 (rw)
/dev/hda5 on /workspace type ext3 (rw)
none on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc type binfmt_misc (rw)
sunrpc on /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs type rpc_pipefs (rw)
Hope this helpes,
Mark.
--
Mark Waddingham ~ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ http://www.runrev.com
Runtime Revolution ~ User-Centric Development Tools
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
On 9/8/05 1:14 PM, "Bob Warren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Your suggestion of "sfdisk -s" to list the mounted volumes on my Ubuntu > Linux machine works exactly as predicted when it is entered through the > terminal, i.e. almost exactly: > >/dev/hda: 12345678 >/dev/hdb: 45678901 >total: 92929292 > > However, doing this through the RR Shell proved to be problematic on account > of the root permission required, as you correctly anticipated. The problem > in Ubuntu is that there is no normal way of "logging on" with root > priveleges. When the normal user calls the (root) terminal, he has to type > in the root password, and it was this part that I could not successfully > incorporate into the RR Shell. Bob, here's how I do it with OSX's shell; perhaps this will work with Linux as well (in this case I'm executing a 'kill' on a process with sudo): put "#!/bin/sh" & cr into tScript put "pw="&tPassword & cr into tScript put "echo $pw | sudo -S kill -9" && tProcessID & cr after tScript get shell(tScript) HTH, Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
Ken: Your suggestion of "sfdisk -s" to list the mounted volumes on my Ubuntu Linux machine works exactly as predicted when it is entered through the terminal, i.e. almost exactly: /dev/hda: 12345678 /dev/hdb: 45678901 total: 92929292 However, doing this through the RR Shell proved to be problematic on account of the root permission required, as you correctly anticipated. The problem in Ubuntu is that there is no normal way of "logging on" with root priveleges. When the normal user calls the (root) terminal, he has to type in the root password, and it was this part that I could not successfully incorporate into the RR Shell. So I tried a workaround to eliminate the necessity of the password and ended up not being able to call the terminal at all! For this (and other) reason(s) I need to clean my computer down and re-install Linux. Good job I have a computer reserved specifically for playing around with Linux! Glenn: Thanks very much for your suggestion, but as you see above I am in the merda at the moment. When I get up and running again, I'll give your suggestion a try. Mark Waddingham (if you are reading this): In our recent discussions regarding the possibility of the early introduction of altBrowser into Linux, I believe you (or Chipp) mentioned the necessity of modifying the RR engine to affect "the way RR calls externals". Excuse my ignorance, but does this have some connection with the way the RR Shell works? Is it possible that the problems I am having with with the Shell (described above) and the transfer of the root password are part and parcel of the same thing? If you can do anything to alleviate the technical fog I am thrashing around in, I would be grateful. Thanks. Bob Bob Warren wrote: >Does this really mean that although a computer may have 2 or 3 physical >drives, there is no way that RR can discover this in Linux? If so, I find >that rather disappointing, don't you? ' >Ken Ray >Sons of Thunder Software >Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ >Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Bob, I don't have Linux handy, but my web search showed you can use: > sfdisk -s >through the shell to get the list of partitions and their sizes (I think you >need to be logged in as root). It will come up with something like this: > /dev/hda: 12345678 > /dev/hdb: 45678901 > total: 92929292 >Drives aren't "named" per se, but they can be identified in this way, >AFAICT. ''' >Glenn E. Fisher University of Houston - Retired >22402 Diane Dr. Spring, Tx 77373 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.uh.edu/~fisher >http://home.houston.rr.com/thegefishers/ >http://homepage.mac.com/gefisher >I don't know Linux, but from my old unix days I remember that "df" was >useful. >You might give it a try. >Best, >Glenn -- ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
On Wed, 07 Sep 2005 14:26:26 -0500 Ken Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Bob, I don't have Linux handy, but my web search showed you can use: > > sfdisk -s > > through the shell to get the list of partitions and their sizes (I think you > need to be logged in as root). It will come up with something like this: > >/dev/hda: 12345678 >/dev/hdb: 45678901 >total: 92929292 > > Drives aren't "named" per se, but they can be identified in this way, > AFAICT. > For a list of all drives use: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo sfdisk -s /dev/hda: 58652496 total: 58652496 blocks For a list of all partitions use: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo sfdisk -l Disk /dev/hda: 116374 cylinders, 16 heads, 63 sectors/track Warning: extended partition does not start at a cylinder boundary. DOS and Linux will interpret the contents differently. Warning: The partition table looks like it was made for C/H/S=*/255/63 (instead of 116374/16/63). For this listing I'll assume that geometry. Units = cylinders of 8225280 bytes, blocks of 1024 bytes, counting from 0 Device Boot Start End #cyls#blocks Id System /dev/hda1 0+499 500- 4016218+ 7 HPFS/NTFS /dev/hda2500 999 50040162507 HPFS/NTFS /dev/hda3 * 100073006301 50612782+ f W95 Ext'd (LBA) /dev/hda4 0 - 0 00 Empty /dev/hda5 1000+ 1005 6- 48163+ 83 Linux /dev/hda6 1006+ 30062001- 16073001 83 Linux /dev/hda7 3007+ 45071501- 12056751 83 Linux /dev/hda8 4508+ 4555 48-385528+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/hda9 4556+ 4561 6- 48163+ 83 Linux /dev/hda10 4562+ 61411580- 12691318+ 83 Linux /dev/hda11 6142+ 73001159- 9309636 83 Linux Chris ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
Bob, Does this really mean that although a computer may have 2 or 3 physical drives, there is no way that RR can discover this in Linux? If so, I find that rather disappointing, don't you? I don't know Linux, but from my old unix days I remember that "df" was useful. You might give it a try. Best, Glenn -- Glenn E. Fisher University of Houston - Retired 22402 Diane Dr. Spring, Tx 77373 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.uh.edu/~fisher http://home.houston.rr.com/thegefishers/ http://homepage.mac.com/gefisher ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
Many thanks once again to Ken and Alex for giving me some ideas to get my teeth into. Bob ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
Bob Warren wrote: Since you obviously have much more experience than I regarding this subject, you might be able to give me a tip or two. For example, let's suppose I have 2 HDs on my computer, and for the sake of argument I have separate distros of Linux installed on each of them with a dual boot on my PC. And say I am running RR under the Linux on my first HD. How should I (or indeed can I) access data on the 2nd HD? If you could clear the fog a little, I'd be grateful. Thanks. My experience is with Unix, not Linux. And it's mostly 15 or more years old :-), and hence somewhat unreliable. I'd think you should be able to get access to it, though probably not in the default config. I do remember reading that most recent Linuxes would support access to the MS-Win partition on a dual-boot (Win+Linux) machine - either an installation option, or possible to mount the Win partition later (so they should certainly be able to access other Linux partitions). You may need to manually add them to fstab I did a quick search&browse on dual-booting Linux, and found this useful snippet (note - he's specifically talking about dual-boot or multi-boot Linuxes) Any Linux system, can mount any Linux partitions in the system not already included in /etc/fstab, so there is no need for a shared /tmp to share data. A shared and automatically mounted /tmp might be easier to remember than which system is on which device. A large shared /tmp may be very useful for doing full system backups of single partition systems as they go over much over 50% full. which suggests that you ought to be able to mount the "other" linux's partitions. This is from http://geodsoft.com/howto/dualboot/ You should also experiment with "df" command to see if that allows you to deduce knowledge of the partitions ... -- Alex Tweedly http://www.tweedly.net -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/90 - Release Date: 05/09/2005 ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
No, you're right Alex, they're probably better termed "top-level directories" as you suggest. Being a newbie in Linux (after only Windows experience) is still a bit confusing at the moment! As far as I know, the main logical partitions of the HD on my Linux machine are "primary" and "swap". Nevertheless, I would be happier getting something out of the "volumes" request rather than nothing at all. Rebol seem to have taken the same view, but I acknowledge that the list of "top-level directories" does not exactly correspond to the description "volumes", and might be misleading. Since you obviously have much more experience than I regarding this subject, you might be able to give me a tip or two. For example, let's suppose I have 2 HDs on my computer, and for the sake of argument I have separate distros of Linux installed on each of them with a dual boot on my PC. And say I am running RR under the Linux on my first HD. How should I (or indeed can I) access data on the 2nd HD? If you could clear the fog a little, I'd be grateful. Thanks. Bob - Original Message - From: "Alex Tweedly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Bob Warren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 4:23 PM Subject: Re: No volumes in Linux? > Bob Warren wrote: > > >Thanks Alex and Ken! > > > >I have just tried the same thing in RB and Rebol. RB also returns empty. > >Interestingly, Rebol gives a list of the partitions created by Linux - which > >at least is a bit more useful. > > > >e.g. > >/usr > >/bin > >/boot > >/dev > >/home > >etc. > > > > > > > Are each of those really separate partitions ? Not simply different > top-level directories ? > > >Does this really mean that although a computer may have 2 or 3 physical > >drives, there is no way that RR can discover this in Linux? If so, I find > >that rather disappointing, don't you? > > > > > > > No, I don't really. > > Physical disks ? > Even on Win, "the volumes" gives you logical partitions, not physical > disks. (e.g. my C: and D: are on the same disk, and Z: is on another > machine entirely.Sometimes there is also Y: volume - and it's on the > same disk (on the other machine) as Z: ). > > On Unix, the mappings between top-level directories, partitions (or > logical volumes as some Unix file systems call them) and physical disks > are even more tenuous (even before we get to automount partitions ). > > What is it that you really want to know ? > > > -- > Alex Tweedly http://www.tweedly.net > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/90 - Release Date: 05/09/2005 > ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
On 9/7/05 1:00 PM, "Bob Warren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does this really mean that although a computer may have 2 or 3 physical > drives, there is no way that RR can discover this in Linux? If so, I find > that rather disappointing, don't you? Bob, I don't have Linux handy, but my web search showed you can use: sfdisk -s through the shell to get the list of partitions and their sizes (I think you need to be logged in as root). It will come up with something like this: /dev/hda: 12345678 /dev/hdb: 45678901 total: 92929292 Drives aren't "named" per se, but they can be identified in this way, AFAICT. Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
Bob Warren wrote: Thanks Alex and Ken! I have just tried the same thing in RB and Rebol. RB also returns empty. Interestingly, Rebol gives a list of the partitions created by Linux - which at least is a bit more useful. e.g. /usr /bin /boot /dev /home etc. Are each of those really separate partitions ? Not simply different top-level directories ? Does this really mean that although a computer may have 2 or 3 physical drives, there is no way that RR can discover this in Linux? If so, I find that rather disappointing, don't you? No, I don't really. Physical disks ? Even on Win, "the volumes" gives you logical partitions, not physical disks. (e.g. my C: and D: are on the same disk, and Z: is on another machine entirely.Sometimes there is also Y: volume - and it's on the same disk (on the other machine) as Z: ). On Unix, the mappings between top-level directories, partitions (or logical volumes as some Unix file systems call them) and physical disks are even more tenuous (even before we get to automount partitions ). What is it that you really want to know ? -- Alex Tweedly http://www.tweedly.net -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/90 - Release Date: 05/09/2005 ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
Thanks Alex and Ken! I have just tried the same thing in RB and Rebol. RB also returns empty. Interestingly, Rebol gives a list of the partitions created by Linux - which at least is a bit more useful. e.g. /usr /bin /boot /dev /home etc. Does this really mean that although a computer may have 2 or 3 physical drives, there is no way that RR can discover this in Linux? If so, I find that rather disappointing, don't you? Best, Bob - Original Message - From: "Alex Tweedly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Bob Warren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "How to use Revolution" Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 1:43 PM Subject: Re: No volumes in Linux? > Bob Warren wrote: > > >According to the Help, and also in practice, "the volumes" for discovering > >what physical drives or logical partitions a computer has ". always > >returns empty on Unix systems". Perhaps I am a bit dim, but could someone > >tell me why? > > > > > On Windows, full file names have a distinct part which can be recognized > as the volume - e.g. > A:\myfile.txt > C:\Our Documents\Alex\RunRev\play.rev > The "A:" and the "C:" are the "volume" part. For example, on my system, > put the volumes > gives me > > > A: > > C: > > D: > > E: > > F: > > Z: > > > On Mac there is (presumably) something similar. > > On Unix the form of a file name is simply > /top/next/another/path/name/part.txt > i.e. there is no part which can be uniquely recognized as a "volume". > > -- > Alex Tweedly http://www.tweedly.net > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/90 - Release Date: 05/09/2005 > ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
On 9/7/05 11:43 AM, "Alex Tweedly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bob Warren wrote: > >> According to the Help, and also in practice, "the volumes" for discovering >> what physical drives or logical partitions a computer has ". always >> returns empty on Unix systems". Perhaps I am a bit dim, but could someone >> tell me why? >> >> > On Windows, full file names have a distinct part which can be recognized > as the volume - e.g. > A:\myfile.txt > C:\Our Documents\Alex\RunRev\play.rev > The "A:" and the "C:" are the "volume" part. For example, on my system, > put the volumes > gives me > >> A: >> C: >> D: >> E: >> F: >> Z: > > > On Mac there is (presumably) something similar. Yes, Actually you get a volume for each mounted partition or drive on your system. If there's only one, it's path is like "/documents/mydoc.txt", but if there's more than one, you need to add "/Volumes/" before the path, as in: /Volumes/Shuttle/documents/mydoc.txt But "the volumes" returns just the names of the mounted partitions/drives. (in my case "Stormwinds" and "Shuttle"). > On Unix the form of a file name is simply > /top/next/another/path/name/part.txt > i.e. there is no part which can be uniquely recognized as a "volume". I guess Unix does something unique with the different partitions/drives that are accessible. Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: No volumes in Linux?
Bob Warren wrote: According to the Help, and also in practice, "the volumes" for discovering what physical drives or logical partitions a computer has ". always returns empty on Unix systems". Perhaps I am a bit dim, but could someone tell me why? On Windows, full file names have a distinct part which can be recognized as the volume - e.g. A:\myfile.txt C:\Our Documents\Alex\RunRev\play.rev The "A:" and the "C:" are the "volume" part. For example, on my system, put the volumes gives me A: C: D: E: F: Z: On Mac there is (presumably) something similar. On Unix the form of a file name is simply /top/next/another/path/name/part.txt i.e. there is no part which can be uniquely recognized as a "volume". -- Alex Tweedly http://www.tweedly.net -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/90 - Release Date: 05/09/2005 ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
No volumes in Linux?
According to the Help, and also in practice, "the volumes" for discovering what physical drives or logical partitions a computer has ". always returns empty on Unix systems". Perhaps I am a bit dim, but could someone tell me why? ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
