On Fri 25 Sep 2020 at 12:28:31 (+), Andy Smith wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 07:49:19AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 07:44:25AM +, Andy Smith wrote:
> > > "hostid" tends to return a hexadecimal representation of the first
> > > IPv4 address (but isn't guarantee
Hello,
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 07:49:19AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 07:44:25AM +, Andy Smith wrote:
> > "hostid" tends to return a hexadecimal representation of the first
> > IPv4 address (but isn't guaranteed to).
>
> unicorn:~$ hostid
> 007f0101
>
> Doesn't look
On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 07:44:25AM +, Andy Smith wrote:
> "hostid" tends to return a hexadecimal representation of the first
> IPv4 address (but isn't guaranteed to).
unicorn:~$ hostid
007f0101
Doesn't look very useful. That's just 127.0.1.1 in a 16-bit little
endian format.
> On a systemd
Hello,
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 08:49:07AM -0600, Charles Curley wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:38:55 -0400
> Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > So you're just doing "sleep 1" every time.
>
> Ah, thank you. Yup. Which is weird, because it worked when I first
> wrote that many years ago.
In cron scripts w
On Sat 12 Sep 2020 at 07:41:19 (-0500), Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * On 2020 12 Sep 02:06 -0500, Lone Learner wrote:
> > POSIX.1-2001 Utilities[1] and POSIX.1-2008 Utilities[2] both list the
> > commands "bc" and "ed" to be part of POSIX.
> >
> > Yet,
* On 2020 12 Sep 02:06 -0500, Lone Learner wrote:
> POSIX.1-2001 Utilities[1] and POSIX.1-2008 Utilities[2] both list the
> commands "bc" and "ed" to be part of POSIX.
>
> Yet, in a brand new Debian installation (version 10 for example),
> these commands are m
On 9/12/20 9:05 AM, Lone Learner wrote:
> POSIX.1-2001 Utilities[1] and POSIX.1-2008 Utilities[2] both list the
> commands "bc" and "ed" to be part of POSIX.
>
> Yet, in a brand new Debian installation (version 10 for example),
> these commands are missi
12 sept. 2020 09:06:19 Lone Learner :
> Why does Debian not include these [posix] commands by default?
>
I guess many debian users don't care about these commands, so it would be rude
to impose something wanted by only a part of the users. And there's the case
of tiny embedde
POSIX.1-2001 Utilities[1] and POSIX.1-2008 Utilities[2] both list the
commands "bc" and "ed" to be part of POSIX.
Yet, in a brand new Debian installation (version 10 for example),
these commands are missing by default:
$ bc
bash: bc: command not found
$ ed
bash: ed: command
On 8/22/2020 6:33 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Vi, 21 aug 20, 21:06:05, john doe wrote:
When I can not get the command I want, I break it down to the simplest
command as possible then I build from there to the command I realy want.
Have you considered that solution(s) found might not be usabl
On Vi, 21 aug 20, 21:06:05, john doe wrote:
>
> When I can not get the command I want, I break it down to the simplest
> command as possible then I build from there to the command I realy want.
Have you considered that solution(s) found might not be usable in the
bigger context, basically wastin
On 8/21/2020 9:00 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 08:51:44PM +0200, john doe wrote:
Okay, it uses the same syntax as for a subshell '$()'.
No, one of them is $'' and the other is $(). They have nothing in common.
One of them is a form of quoting. It acts just like '' except
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 08:51:44PM +0200, john doe wrote:
> Okay, it uses the same syntax as for a subshell '$()'.
No, one of them is $'' and the other is $(). They have nothing in common.
One of them is a form of quoting. It acts just like '' except that it
performs various backslash expansion
On 8/21/2020 8:37 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 02:35:35PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
No. Use $'...' instead of '...'.
sed '/line1/{N;N;a line-to-add\n}' input-file
Crap. Of course I meant to write
sed $'/line1/{N;N;a line-to-add\n}' input-file
Okay, it uses the same
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 02:35:35PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> No. Use $'...' instead of '...'.
>
> sed '/line1/{N;N;a line-to-add\n}' input-file
Crap. Of course I meant to write
sed $'/line1/{N;N;a line-to-add\n}' input-file
ter key. That's portable to every sh family shell.
>
> Actually, I do not know, that is why I'm asking in here! :)
The Subject: header is a bit ambiguous, because you mention "POSIX
compliant sed", but you're asking on debian-user, where sed is not
necessarily PO
On 8/21/2020 7:51 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 07:49:07PM +0200, john doe wrote:
Hello all,
I'm trying to use the command provided at (1):
$ sed '/pattern{N;N;a try\d10}' input-file
sed: -e expression #1, char 0: unmatched `{'
Are you missing a second / character after th
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 07:49:07PM +0200, john doe wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm trying to use the command provided at (1):
>
> $ sed '/pattern{N;N;a try\d10}' input-file
> sed: -e expression #1, char 0: unmatched `{'
Are you missing a second / character after the pattern?
Why are you obfuscating
above it does not.
What am I missing?
The idea is to be able to append a line two lines after a match while
being POSIX compliant.
1)
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/30099736/sed-insert-line-after-x-lines-after-match
--
John Doe
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 22:30:02 +0400, Konstantin Khomoutov wrote:
> I'd like to dump an ext3 filesystem which might uses xattrs and might
> use file capabilities. I'd very much like to pipe its output to another
> machine (via netcat or some other means) which frames out fsarchiver [1]
> which requ
I'd like to dump an ext3 filesystem which might uses xattrs and might
use file capabilities. I'd very much like to pipe its output to
another machine (via netcat or some other means) which frames out
fsarchiver [1] which requires lseeks() on the file it generates.
So I'd like to use something like
Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> plus I started to use libnss-ldapd, found it a bit more stable
I gave libnss-ldapd a try and it's now working fine without changes on
the configuration. Thanks.
Ansgar
--
PGP: 1024D/595FAD19 739E 2D09 0969 BEA9 9797 B055 DDB0 2FF7 595F AD19
--
To U
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 03:19:11PM +0100, frank wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 15:48 +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> >
> > I'm having problems setting up LDAP with POSIX groups. I can see groups
> > and members with "getent group mygroup", but am not a memb
Hi,
frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 15:48 +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> I'm having problems setting up LDAP with POSIX groups. I can see groups
>> and members with "getent group mygroup", but am not a member after
>> log
On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 15:48 +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>
> I'm having problems setting up LDAP with POSIX groups. I can see groups
> and members with "getent group mygroup", but am not a member after
> logging in.
>
> To configure LDAP, I added
>
>
Hi,
I'm having problems setting up LDAP with POSIX groups. I can see groups
and members with "getent group mygroup", but am not a member after
logging in.
To configure LDAP, I added
nss_base_group ou=Group,dc=example,dc=com?sub
to /etc/libnss-ldap.conf and pam_ldap.conf.
07-08-2007, Vincent Lefevre:
[]
> Not every system has bash. If this is for compatibility, you can learn
> POSIX sh, but e.g. Solaris /bin/sh is not a POSIX sh.
And Windows will have `sh` soon, called "Microsoft Suxe Shell" (C) Novell.
> For this reason and because POSIX sh is
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 02:21:36AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> The pax package is optional. But as the pax utility is required by
> POSIX[*], shouldn't this package be required?
>
> [*] http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/pax.html
>
Why? RPM is also
The pax package is optional. But as the pax utility is required by
POSIX[*], shouldn't this package be required?
[*] http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/pax.html
--
Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validat
> > I'm surprised that libc6-dev is only a "recommends" and not
> > a "depends" for gcc.
>
> Gcc is quite useful without libc6-dev. For compiling a kernel, for
> example.
Good point.
> > To build slapd, you may also need (according to apt-build
> info slapd)
>
> 'apt-get build-dep slapd' wil
Kevin Ross writes:
> I'm surprised that libc6-dev is only a "recommends" and not a "depends"
> for gcc.
Gcc is quite useful without libc6-dev. For compiling a kernel, for
example.
> To build slapd, you may also need (according to apt-build info slapd)
'apt-get build-dep slapd' will install all
> I need POSIX regex to compile openldap-2.3.28. Does anyone know which
> package has it?
libc6-dev
I'm surprised that libc6-dev is only a "recommends" and not a "depends" for
gcc. But whatever.
To build slapd, you may also need (according to apt-build inf
Hi,
I need POSIX regex to compile openldap-2.3.28. Does anyone know which
package has it?
Thanks,
Andre
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi all,
I would like to implement POSIX ACLs on a Debian server.
The partition is formatted with ReiserFS.
I am using the default 2.4 kernel in 3.1r2 (2.4.27-2-386)
I understand that POSIX ACLs were introduced with 2.6 kernels.
I see that Debian most likely patched the 2.4 kernel for POSIX
ckage manpages (which
> manpages-posix recommends you install :-).
Well, google showed me the actual manpage (once I knew the name), and
it's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks alot.
--
John L. Fjellstad
web: http://www.fjellstad.org/ Quis custodiet ipsos custodes
--
T
ev/mqueue?
>
>Doing a man on mq_overview tells me there is no such man page. man on
>mqueue.h and mq_open doesn't mention a mq_overview man page.
>There is no /dev/mqueue on my filesystem (using udev).
>
>I have the posix man pages installed (both manpages-posix and
>manp
eue.h and mq_open doesn't mention a mq_overview man page.
There is no /dev/mqueue on my filesystem (using udev).
I have the posix man pages installed (both manpages-posix and
manpages-posix-dev), so I think I should have everything installed (in
regards to man pages)
I appreciate the help.
-
On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 12:13:19AM -0700, John L Fjellstad wrote:
>I'm trying to write a program using posix and sysV message queues. For
>sysV, there is a utility, ipcs and icprm that lets me inspect and
>remove messages from the queue. Anyone know if there is a similar
>util
I'm trying to write a program using posix and sysV message queues. For
sysV, there is a utility, ipcs and icprm that lets me inspect and remove
messages from the queue. Anyone know if there is a similar utility for
posix msg queues?
--
John L. Fjellstad
web: http://www.fjellsta
o "en_US", and the alphabetic order is
followed rather than being separated out by upper-lower case.
Curt-
On Thursday 04 May 2006 11:46, Curt Howland was heard to say:
> Ok, I'm stuck with everything equalling "POSIX". I looked through
> the archives and cann
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ok, I'm stuck with everything equalling "POSIX". I looked through the
archives and cannot find how to clear the problem. I recall it was
something like "delete this file and reconfigure locales", but as I
said I cannot fin
Hi,
Feature test macro _POSIX_SOURCE refers to which edition of POSIX.1 ?
And _XOPEN_SOURCE refers to which SUS version ?
I've got installed libc6 and glibc-doc both 2.3.5-7. I've carefully read the
documentation from these packages, but couldn't find clear, unambiguous
answer
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 02:10:46PM -0800, William Ballard wrote:
> Given:
>
> A - 1
> A - 2
> B - 1
> B - 2
>
> what's the simplest command or perl script to print it as:
>
> A (1, 2)
> B (1, 2)
>
> or something equivalent.
Hmm, one of the zillions of ways of doing something equivalent, with t
Moin,
* William Ballard wrote (2004-04-02 00:10):
>Given:
>
>A - 1
>A - 2
>B - 1
>B - 2
>
>what's the simplest command or perl script to print it as:
>
>A (1, 2)
>B (1, 2)
>
>or something equivalent.
Is that an array? Depending on the size and whether it's fixed I would
use either printf or somet
Given:
A - 1
A - 2
B - 1
B - 2
what's the simplest command or perl script to print it as:
A (1, 2)
B (1, 2)
or something equivalent.
Thanks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ok, I'm seeing different behavior with differnet shells and different
operating systems.
I've tried looking for the POSIX spec to see the correct behavior but
not having much luck with my googling skills today.
Anyone know where to look up the POSIX spec on how a shell is suppose
Linux For U Magazine
(www.linuxforu.com , a magazine for linux users in India ) by KT
Ligesh in which a paragraph about old linux threads was mentioned. It
was mentioned that it can take about 15 minutes for that old threading
to start &stop 1,00,000 threads. With new Native Posix threading
Library (NPTL) an
Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-11-10 19:41:08 -0500]:
> This one time, at band camp, Bruce Park said:
> > What exactly is a POSIX shell?
> It is a shell that complies with the Portable Operating System Interface
> - basically, system calls, expected behaviors a
This one time, at band camp, Bruce Park said:
> What exactly is a POSIX shell?
>
> bp
It is a shell that complies with the Portable Operating System Interface
- basically, system calls, expected behaviors and that sort of thing.
Makes it easier for programmers to write cross-platform
What exactly is a POSIX shell?
bp
_
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubs
Hi There,
I have Potato 2.2.19 kernel and the following packages installed
libc6-dev 2.2.5-4,
libpth-dev 1.4.1-2 and glibc-doc 2.2.5-4. I was trying to understand the
concepts of threads on linux. I executed a program from Stevens book and is
attached to this mail. On the command
[ "Michael P. Soulier"
]
Re: mailq [ Davor Balder
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: dpkg-scanpackages on an official [ Martin F Krafft
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
Re: newbe-ish question - POSIX ? [ Davor Balder
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
print
On Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 06:08:48PM +0530, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What is POSIX and what does it entail ?
>
> Thanks (Sorry for the stupid question)
> SK
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". T
What is POSIX and what does it entail ?
Thanks (Sorry for the stupid question)
SK
Hola.
Cual es el mejor antivirus para su distribución, es para el servidor de
correo.
Gracias.
a friend asked me to extract a text file from a floppy "unix formatted".
I can see this file looking with mc (is a little data base of pc spare
parts) in /dev/fd0, but i can't mount the floppy: no vfat, no ext2, no
sysv.
The command " file /tmp/foo " produces this ou
Is there any electronic information available that describes
what a getopt library (no, not another one in C :-) must
allow and disallow to be POSIX compliant?
--
.elOle.
On: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 17:07:42 +0200 (METDST) Stelios Parnassidis writes:
>
> Is the old (?) ps, the one with the PS_PEERSONALITY setting, to
> find under debian ?
>
> I'm running/poerting a huge package related to my job, which rely
> very heavy on the posix
Is the old (?) ps, the one with the PS_PEERSONALITY setting, to find
under debian ?
I'm running/poerting a huge package related to my job, which rely
very heavy on the posix conform switches of 'ps'.
One of a sudden sometime ago nothing goes anymore because
in many cases
On 23 Feb 1998, Tommi Kaariainen wrote:
> I updated procps (+ other stuff) to the newest version(s) in the Debian
> mirror I use (sunsite.auc.dk) and found out that the (much more useful)
> POSIX-style ps options no longer work. Why were they removed?
Debian fell back to use the u
Tommi Kaariainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I updated procps (+ other stuff) to the newest version(s) in the Debian
> mirror I use (sunsite.auc.dk) and found out that the (much more useful)
> POSIX-style ps options no longer work. Why were they removed?
>
> /Tommi Kääri
I updated procps (+ other stuff) to the newest version(s) in the Debian
mirror I use (sunsite.auc.dk) and found out that the (much more useful)
POSIX-style ps options no longer work. Why were they removed?
/Tommi Kääriäinen/
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word
On 26 Sep 1997, TENCC01.LEWIS01 wrote:
> To be an actual factual posix system you have to pass a test suite that
> requires
> a bunch of money. If the test suite is ever put in public domain, linux may
> get
> a posix rating.
These are rather old postings but I think they
I can't say debian is "posix conformant". However, I have been
developing c code on hpux, dec osf1, and aix for some years now. Linux
is as good as any of those. When it comes to supporting old standards
like bsd, linux is probably a bit better.
To be an actual factual posix
On Sep 25, Mario de Mello B. Neto wrote
> I am a Linux user and I need information regarding linux (debian,RedHat,
> Slackware) and its conformance to IEEE POSIX standards, specially those
> that Microsoft Windows NT is not compliant.
I'm nowhere near a standards expert, but
; Dear Sirs,
>
> I am a Linux user and I need information regarding linux (debian,RedHat,
> Slackware) and its conformance to IEEE POSIX standards, specially those
> that Microsoft Windows NT is not compliant.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Mario de Mello B. Neto.
>
>
Dear Sirs,
I am a Linux user and I need information regarding linux (debian,RedHat,
Slackware) and its conformance to IEEE POSIX standards, specially those
that Microsoft Windows NT is not compliant.
Best regards,
Mario de Mello B. Neto.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e
ffset is
due to overzealous compliance with a broken POSIX requirement in version
7.55 of the timezone package. Apparently the POSIX committee, in a moment
of idiocy, decreed that POSIX time leave off the leap seconds that have
been added to UTC periodically since 1972. There have been 20 of
Hi Bruce,
>Actually, until recently you could only be POSIX compliant by paying
>a lot of money. You paid for copies of the standard, you paid for
>validation software, and you paid for a POSIX compliance lab to certify
>you. So it was a way for the well-funded commercial Linux
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gith)
> Is the Debian distribution going to push for POSIX conformity?
Yes, because it just got easy and cheap.
> I may be missing something here, ( I'm still a relative newbie
> to Linux ) but what is the importance of it? After viewing the
> Linux-
Is the Debian distribution going to push for POSIX conformity?
I may be missing something here, ( I'm still a relative newbie
to Linux ) but what is the importance of it? After viewing the
Linux-FT web pages, the only good thing I can see about a Posix
certification is the right to go a
71 matches
Mail list logo
