Re: vlc: unable to set resolution at command line

On 6/15/20 7:27 PM, mick crane wrote: I don't know much about VLC, I'd probably change the resolution with FFmpeg and watch that. mick I think he wants, when he opens the "oh" window, to have a constant/fixed width and length. Not to change the width and length or quality of the video.

Re: vlc: unable to set resolution at command line

On 2020-06-15 16:44, Franco Martelli wrote: Hi everybody, I'm on Debian Buster 10.4 vlc version: "VLC media player 3.0.10 Vetinari". I want to run vlc at command line setting the resolution of 720x576 but the vlc's window start at the resolution of the mp4 file. Under Pr

vlc: unable to set resolution at command line

Hi everybody, I'm on Debian Buster 10.4 vlc version: "VLC media player 3.0.10 Vetinari". I want to run vlc at command line setting the resolution of 720x576 but the vlc's window start at the resolution of the mp4 file. Under Preference->Interfaces->Main Interfaces-

Re: aptitude recommends allowance at command line only.

Johan Grönqvist (johan.gronqv...@gmail.com on 2011-08-02 08:20 +0200): > From > > there seems to be an option: > > -r, --with-recommends > > Treat recommendations as dependencies when installing new > packages (t

Re: aptitude recommends allowance at command line only.

2011-08-02 07:58, Sthu Deus skrev: Good time of the day. I wonder if it is possible (may I missed the option somehow, - as I read its --help but did not find a solution) to specify at command line of aptitude to install recommends From <http://algebraicthunk.net/~dburrows/projects/aptit

aptitude recommends allowance at command line only.

Good time of the day. I wonder if it is possible (may I missed the option somehow, - as I read its --help but did not find a solution) to specify at command line of aptitude to install recommends - when it is disabled in preferences or whatever file? - Meaning I want always to disable it but

Re: at command stopped working

rited environment of the current shell. But I guess writing > DISPLAY=:0.0 is not too bad. Thank you for your help! the "at command" of course inherits variables from current shell. However it does not export all of them, so when the command is executed by "atd" daemon, comma

Re: at command stopped working

[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ > at 0720 warning: commands will be executed using /bin/sh at> DISPLAY=:0.0 gvim at> job 125 at Tue Aug 8 07:20:00 2006 I guess I missed the fact that 'at' still worked with non graphical applications, and the above solution for X applications now works too! I wonder why th

Re: at command stopped working

On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:12:48AM +0200, Frank Blendinger wrote: > On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 02:08:18PM -0400, Mike Polyakov wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ > > $ at 14:00 > > warning: commands will be executed using /bin/sh > > at> gvim > > at> > > job 21 at Mon Aug 7 14:00:00 2006 > > I guess gv

Re: at command stopped working

On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 02:08:18PM -0400, Mike Polyakov wrote: > Yes, the job shows up when I run "atq". I also checked the syslog file > and it doesn't seem to contain anything relevant to "at" command. Here > is output from my shell: > > [EMAIL PROTECT

Re: at command stopped working

Yes, the job shows up when I run "atq". I also checked the syslog file and it doesn't seem to contain anything relevant to "at" command. Here is output from my shell: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ $ date Mon Aug 7 13:59:11 EDT 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ $ at 14:00 warning: comman

Re: at command stopped working

On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 22:25:07 -0400, Mike Polyakov wrote: > Hi everyone, > My 'at' command stopped worked after kernel upgrade. Nothing seems to > be executing at the specified time. I tried to do it as root and still > no results. I checked that my atd daemon is running a

at command stopped working

Hi everyone, My 'at' command stopped worked after kernel upgrade. Nothing seems to be executing at the specified time. I tried to do it as root and still no results. I checked that my atd daemon is running and that /etc/at.deny does not contain users running 'at'. Does anyb

Re: Some trouble with at command

On 4/17/06, sfantar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am having some problems with the at command. I do not receive any > confirmation mail after setting my at command properly with its options. > Furthermore, as it is written in the man page concerning at, I have > reinstalled se

Some trouble with at command

Hello everyone I am having some problems with the at command. I do not receive any confirmation mail after setting my at command properly with its options. Furthermore, as it is written in the man page concerning at, I have reinstalled sendmail in order to prevent from having a problem with

Re: apt-get errors out religiously while processing 'at' command

Maurits van Rees wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 07:39:23PM -0500, Eric P wrote: > >>Hmm... maybe I just fixed it. I uninstalled the 'at' package, and >>apt-get no longer complains. > > > You may want to try reinstalling it now and see if things continue to > work normally. On my sarge system

Re: apt-get errors out religiously while processing 'at' command

On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 07:39:23PM -0500, Eric P wrote: > Hmm... maybe I just fixed it. I uninstalled the 'at' package, and > apt-get no longer complains. You may want to try reinstalling it now and see if things continue to work normally. On my sarge system 'at' and 'apt-get' work perfectly hap

Re: apt-get errors out religiously while processing 'at' command

Eric P wrote: > I'm running etch, and I recently ran an upgrade which installed many > packages including Gnome 2.10 and Xorg. During the middle of the > upgrade, apt-get kept erroring out with the following (xbill just as an > example): > > Unpacking xbill (from .../archives/xbill_2.1-4_i386.deb

apt-get errors out religiously while processing 'at' command

I'm running etch, and I recently ran an upgrade which installed many packages including Gnome 2.10 and Xorg. During the middle of the upgrade, apt-get kept erroring out with the following (xbill just as an example): Unpacking xbill (from .../archives/xbill_2.1-4_i386.deb) ... Setting up at (3.1.9

Re: chat -- AT command

Hello Debian Users! On śro 09 maj 2001 07:50:54 GMT John Hasler wrote: > Add "REPORT CONNECT" to the top of your chatscript OK, thx. Unfortunately that's not exactly what I want to do. Chat is invoked with the -v options which means, that it should be verbose: it should log everything what comes

Re: chat -- AT command

Tomasz Olszewski writes: > Has anybody had a similar problem? It is working. You told chat to look for CONNECT, and when it found it, it told you so. You didn't mention the 33600 so it ignored that. Add "REPORT CONNECT" to the top of your chatscript and call chat with the option '-r filename' a

chat -- AT command

I want my modem to show the real connecion speed. I found in the modem's docs that AT\V0 does this. If I use minicom it works perfectly. I send: ATZ get OK AT\V0 get OK ATDTthe_number ...and the proper connection speed (CONNECT 33600) However if I try the same in my chatsript it just doesn't work.

Re: "at" command?

On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:55:37AM -0700, Krzys Majewski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Where do I find the "at" command, or equivalent, which is like > a command-line crontab that says: execute such-and-such > command and such-and-such date and time. A search for "at",

"at" command?

Where do I find the "at" command, or equivalent, which is like a command-line crontab that says: execute such-and-such command and such-and-such date and time. A search for "at", as you can imagine, is not very helpful. -chris

Re: running apt from an at command

apt-get -d -y dselect-upgrade I use it all the time (not from a cron, though. 56k modems suck) On Fri, Oct 15, 1999 at 06:43:13AM -, Pollywog wrote: > I ran 'apt-get -d upgrade' from an 'at' command and just figured out why this > did not work. When it is run, apt

Re: running apt from an at command

Run it with -y apt-get will assume "yes"to all prompts and will run non-interactively. sorry for the other message!!! On Fri, 15 Oct 1999, Pollywog wrote: > I ran 'apt-get -d upgrade' from an 'at' command and just figured out why this > did not work. When

Re: running apt from an at command

Run it whi -y apt-get will assume yes to all prompts and will and non-interactively On Fri, 15 Oct 1999, Pollywog wrote: > I ran 'apt-get -d upgrade' from an 'at' command and just figured out why this > did not work. When it is run, apt-get asks if I really want to d

running apt from an at command

I ran 'apt-get -d upgrade' from an 'at' command and just figured out why this did not work. When it is run, apt-get asks if I really want to download, and since there is nobody at the keyboard to enter "Y", the command does not execute. Is there a way to enter

Re: 'at' command/ Apology

First an apology. Some of us, at least myself, don't like to be confronted with our stupidity. Why I choose to advertize it, then, is another question. On Tue, 18 Feb 1997, Siggy Brentrup wrote: > I apologize if you took my citing of the man page as RTFM. Please attribute it > to my poor English

Re: 'at' command

On Tue, Feb 18 1997, Mike Miller wrote: > > Thanks to those that replied with a working answer. > bash$ at 10:30 > cdplay > C-d (I did at least know this much). > > I was disappointed by the flood of RTFM, however. I couldn't find an > example in the man pages, or Running

Re: 'at' command

17 Feb 1997, Mike Miller wrote: > > I'm sure this is trivial, but can someone give me an example of an at > command that works? > I tried at 10:30 cdplay > It queued, and left the queue, but did not play. Thinking it was a path > problem, I tried >

Re: 'at' command

On Mon, 17 Feb 1997 10:22:54 MST Mike Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > I'm sure this is trivial, but can someone give me an example of an at > command that works? > > I tried at 10:30 cdplay > It queued, and left the queue, but did not play. Thinking it was