On Thursday, Mar 26th 2009 at 20:30 -, quoth Tom Horsley:
=>Doing "whatever > /dev/null" wasn't too bad, but when
=>someone said "whatever < /dev/null" amazingly random things
=>could happen.
Years ago I had a client who ran out of disk. I eventually found out that
he was backing up to /dev/
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 16:08 +0100, Roberto Ragusa wrote:
> Tom Horsley wrote:
>
> > Could be, but I had /dev/null deleted on a machine once and
> > the ensuing fun was really spectacular :-).
> >
> > Doing "whatever > /dev/null" wasn't too bad, but when
> > someone said "whatever < /dev/null" ama
g wrote:
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Script typo. Try this:
find /etc -type file | xargs grep -l '/dev/nul[^l]'
should that be " -type f "?
A more interesting characteristic is that it requires that there
be a character following "/dev/nul". IME redirection
is often the last thing on the line
M
Tom Horsley wrote:
> Could be, but I had /dev/null deleted on a machine once and
> the ensuing fun was really spectacular :-).
>
> Doing "whatever > /dev/null" wasn't too bad, but when
> someone said "whatever < /dev/null" amazingly random things
> could happen.
Even funnier stuff happened to me
On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 23:50 -0400, Joe Smith wrote:
> Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> > ...
> >> For fun, I looked at: /etc/init.d/nsd and there was code
> >> in two places that had: 2>%1 (a stderr redirect?) and I suspected
> >> it was intended to be: 2>&1? I was not sure the % was
> >> something I h
On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 19:07 -0700, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> > Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
> >> Rick Stevens wrote:
> >>
> >>> Do NOT ignore it. I don't think you quite understand what /dev/null
> >>> is. It is supposed to be a device, not a file. Somehow it got dele
On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 18:03 -0700, Rick Stevens wrote:
> Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> > Tom Horsley wrote:
> >> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:07:54 -0400
> >> brian wrote:
> >>
> >>
> It means some script somewhere did an rm -f on /dev/null
> then later some other script redirected output to /de
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
From: rkhunter:
Warning: Suspicious file types found in /dev:
/dev/nul: ASCII text
Looking @ /dev/nul:
=
# more /dev/nul
nsdc: no patch necessary.
=
What d
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
The "clue" I left was:
===[/dev/nul]=
# more /dev/nul
nsdc: no patch necessary.
For fun, I looked at: /etc/init.d/nsd and there was code
in two places that had: 2>%1 (a stderr redirect?) and
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
...
For fun, I looked at: /etc/init.d/nsd and there was code
in two places that had: 2>%1 (a stderr redirect?) and I suspected
it was intended to be: 2>&1? I was not sure the % was
something I have seen before - this does not exists in the
entire /etc/init.d directory
Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Script typo. Try this:
> find /etc -type file | xargs grep -l '/dev/nul[^l]'
should that be " -type f "?
--
peace out.
tc,hago.
g
.
in a free world without fences, who needs gates.
**
help microsoft stamp out piracy - give linux to a friend today
**
to mess up
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
From: rkhunter:
Warning: Suspicious file types found in /dev:
/dev/nul: ASCII text
Looking @ /dev/nul:
=
# more /dev/nul
nsdc: no patch necessary.
=
What d
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
Rick Stevens wrote:
Do NOT ignore it. I don't think you quite understand what /dev/null
is. It is supposed to be a device, not a file. Somehow it got
deleted
and now whenever a script or something does a redirec
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
Rick Stevens wrote:
Do NOT ignore it. I don't think you quite understand what /dev/null
is. It is supposed to be a device, not a file. Somehow it got deleted
and now whenever a script or something does a redirect of its output to
/dev/nul
Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
Rick Stevens wrote:
Do NOT ignore it. I don't think you quite understand what /dev/null
is. It is supposed to be a device, not a file. Somehow it got deleted
and now whenever a script or something does a redirect of its output to
/dev/null, instead of going to a
Rick Stevens wrote:
>
> Do NOT ignore it. I don't think you quite understand what /dev/null
> is. It is supposed to be a device, not a file. Somehow it got deleted
> and now whenever a script or something does a redirect of its output to
> /dev/null, instead of going to a device (and thence int
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:07:54 -0400
brian wrote:
It means some script somewhere did an rm -f on /dev/null
then later some other script redirected output to /dev/null
thus creating it as a regular file.
It looks more like a t
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 08:13:41PM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:40:06 -0700
> Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
>
> > Looking @ /dev/nul:
> > =
> > # more /dev/nul
> > nsdc: no patch necessary.
> > =
> >
> > What does this mean?
>
> It means s
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:07:54 -0400
brian wrote:
It means some script somewhere did an rm -f on /dev/null
then later some other script redirected output to /dev/null
thus creating it as a regular file.
It looks more like a typo, as another
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:07:54 -0400
brian wrote:
It means some script somewhere did an rm -f on /dev/null
then later some other script redirected output to /dev/null
thus creating it as a regular file.
It looks more like a typo, as another
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:07:54 -0400
brian wrote:
It means some script somewhere did an rm -f on /dev/null
then later some other script redirected output to /dev/null
thus creating it as a regular file.
It looks more like a typo, as another poster sai
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:07:54 -0400
brian wrote:
It means some script somewhere did an rm -f on /dev/null
then later some other script redirected output to /dev/null
thus creating it as a regular file.
It looks more like a typo, as another poster said (one L).
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:07:54 -0400
brian wrote:
> > It means some script somewhere did an rm -f on /dev/null
> > then later some other script redirected output to /dev/null
> > thus creating it as a regular file.
> >
> It looks more like a typo, as another poster said (one L).
Could be, but I
Tom Horsley wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:40:06 -0700
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
Looking @ /dev/nul:
=
# more /dev/nul
nsdc: no patch necessary.
=
What does this mean?
It means some script somewhere did an rm -f on /dev/null
then later some other script
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:40:06 -0700
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
> Looking @ /dev/nul:
> =
> # more /dev/nul
> nsdc: no patch necessary.
> =
>
> What does this mean?
It means some script somewhere did an rm -f on /dev/null
then later some other script redirecte
Daniel B. Thurman wrote:
From: rkhunter:
Warning: Suspicious file types found in /dev:
/dev/nul: ASCII text
Looking @ /dev/nul:
=
# more /dev/nul
nsdc: no patch necessary.
=
What d
From: rkhunter:
Warning: Suspicious file types found in /dev:
/dev/nul: ASCII text
Looking @ /dev/nul:
=
# more /dev/nul
nsdc: no patch necessary.
=
What does this mean?
Thanks!
Da
27 matches
Mail list logo
