• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

UNIX NOOB

Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: arcenite
what does the star after a file name mean and how do I get rid of it?

ex: powerbill.cxx*

Word
Click to expand...

I think it means it is a command or exe type file.
Click to expand...

Oh... but... it's not...

I mean that makes sense because when I compile it, it creates the file a.out*, but, bbqtuna it's not an executable!
 
Originally posted by: arcenite
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: arcenite
what does the star after a file name mean and how do I get rid of it?

ex: powerbill.cxx*

Word
Click to expand...

I think it means it is a command or exe type file.
Click to expand...

Oh... but... it's not...

I mean that makes sense because when I compile it, it creates the file a.out*, but, bbqtuna it's not an executable!
Click to expand...

I only know enough about the *nix to be dangerous but isn't there a chmod flag that you can set any file to be an "executable" type file?
 
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: arcenite
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: arcenite
what does the star after a file name mean and how do I get rid of it?

ex: powerbill.cxx*

Word
Click to expand...

I think it means it is a command or exe type file.
Click to expand...

Oh... but... it's not...

I mean that makes sense because when I compile it, it creates the file a.out*, but, bbqtuna it's not an executable!
Click to expand...

I only know enough about the *nix to be dangerous but isn't there a chmod flag that you can set any file to be an "executable" type file?
Click to expand...

I have no idea. How do I use this chmod command?
 
Originally posted by: arcenite
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: arcenite
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: arcenite
what does the star after a file name mean and how do I get rid of it?

ex: powerbill.cxx*

Word
Click to expand...

I think it means it is a command or exe type file.
Click to expand...

Oh... but... it's not...

I mean that makes sense because when I compile it, it creates the file a.out*, but, bbqtuna it's not an executable!
Click to expand...

I only know enough about the *nix to be dangerous but isn't there a chmod flag that you can set any file to be an "executable" type file?
Click to expand...

I have no idea. How do I use this chmod command?
Click to expand...

chmod Tutorial
 
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: arcenite
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: arcenite
Originally posted by: Linflas
Originally posted by: arcenite
what does the star after a file name mean and how do I get rid of it?

ex: powerbill.cxx*

Word
Click to expand...

I think it means it is a command or exe type file.
Click to expand...

Oh... but... it's not...

I mean that makes sense because when I compile it, it creates the file a.out*, but, bbqtuna it's not an executable!
Click to expand...

I only know enough about the *nix to be dangerous but isn't there a chmod flag that you can set any file to be an "executable" type file?
Click to expand...

I have no idea. How do I use this chmod command?
Click to expand...

chmod Tutorial
Click to expand...

Got it, you da man!

btw it's chmod -x filename

 
Originally posted by: arcenite
what does the star after a file name mean and how do I get rid of it?

ex: powerbill.cxx*

Word
Click to expand...

I'll give this a shot. I have yet to encounter a file in UNIX ending with '*'. Usually * is a wildcard that can represent 1 or more characters in a regular expression.

e.g cp /* /home/*

would copy all files in that directory to the /home directory. An easy way to tell if a file is executable is to give the 'ls -l' command for a long listing. You may want to issue 'ls -l | more' if it's a large directory. Or alternatively 'ls -l | grep "filename".

In the first column you'll see something like this

-rwxr-xr-x the 'x' is what determines who can execute the file. The first 3 spaces belong to 'owner' the 2nd 3 spaces belong to the 'group' and the third 3 spaces belong to 'others'

the rwx represents the permissions for owner (rwx), group (r-x) and others (r-x). If you have permissions you can use the 'chmod' comand to make the file executable, but the extension won't change. (In UNIX any file can be made executable)

Issue './"fileneme"' to execute the file.

Hope this helps!
JR..
 
It depends on how you get that to show up. If you've done ls -F, it means the file is an executable. If you just do an ls, some idiot named the file incorrectly.

EDIT: I guess I should mention this. It's a thread for just this type of thing, and someone was nice enough to sticky it.
 
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It depends on how you get that to show up. If you've done ls -F, it means the file is an executable. If you just do an ls, some idiot named the file incorrectly.

EDIT: I guess I should mention this. It's a thread for just this type of thing, and someone was nice enough to sticky it.
Click to expand...

Ah HA!!! [lightbulb] That explains why I've never seen it. SCO OpenServer (only UNIX I work with) returnes executables as 'filename@' with 'ls -F', but 'ls -lF' tags the * behind executables in long list mode. Curiouser and curiouser....

Good info n0c!
 
Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It depends on how you get that to show up. If you've done ls -F, it means the file is an executable. If you just do an ls, some idiot named the file incorrectly.

EDIT: I guess I should mention this. It's a thread for just this type of thing, and someone was nice enough to sticky it.
Click to expand...

Ah HA!!! [lightbulb] That explains why I've never seen it. SCO OpenServer (only UNIX I work with) returnes executables as 'filename@' with 'ls -F', but 'ls -lF' tags the * behind executables in long list mode. Curiouser and curiouser....

Good info n0c!
Click to expand...

Interesting. On Linux and OpenBSD using ls -F or ls -lF give executables an '*' at the end, and symlinks get '@'. I wonder why SCO is so retarded...
 
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It depends on how you get that to show up. If you've done ls -F, it means the file is an executable. If you just do an ls, some idiot named the file incorrectly.

EDIT: I guess I should mention this. It's a thread for just this type of thing, and someone was nice enough to sticky it.
Click to expand...

Ah HA!!! [lightbulb] That explains why I've never seen it. SCO OpenServer (only UNIX I work with) returnes executables as 'filename@' with 'ls -F', but 'ls -lF' tags the * behind executables in long list mode. Curiouser and curiouser....

Good info n0c!
Click to expand...

Interesting. On Linux and OpenBSD using ls -F or ls -lF give executables an '*' at the end, and symlinks get '@'. I wonder why SCO is so retarded...
Click to expand...

My God! The stories I could tell you about just how we-todd-did SCO really is. What a P.O.S.!

[clears throat] For instance.... Take two completely identical machines from ADS. Neither one has ever had an OS loaded before, both have the same BIOS setting. Two identical machines right down the line. Now in these machines you have to install PCIMCIA card readers. Both machines use on board video with shared memory. For whatever reason, machine A will not start the Xserver after the card reader is installed. No problem... probably a resourse conflict so you go into BIOS and knock the video memory from the default 64M to 32M. Problem solved. Enter machine B. Same machine, same scenerio. Except this time the Xserver just won't start period no matter what the video memory is set to. Who knows why? Certainly not SCO's tech support OR their joke of a knowledge base.

Example two. You've got your machine running like a champ so you do a Lone-Tar backup on DVD. Basically makeing an install disk that is a clone of your current setup. You build two more machines of identical make and model, from the Lone-Tar backup, but neither one of them runs like the first one. Sometimes you might get an ISAM error or httpd can't find it's SSL keys or some other nonsense. Remember the baseline platform is identical for all machines. Why does SCO act this way? I dont' know and neither does SCO.

Also they license the h3ll out of everything. TCP/IP for example is a separate license you have to buy from SCO NOT included with the Operating System. WTF over??

If I weren't forced to work with it I'd dump this POS Unix for some nice Sun equipment faster than you can spell IT.

Anyway, that's just for starters. Like I said. The stories I could tell you about SCO.:|

/rant
 
Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer
My God! The stories I could tell you about just how we-todd-did SCO really is. What a P.O.S.!

[clears throat] For instance.... Take two completely identical machines from ADS. Neither one has ever had an OS loaded before, both have the same BIOS setting. Two identical machines right down the line. Now in these machines you have to install PCIMCIA card readers. Both machines use on board video with shared memory. For whatever reason, machine A will not start the Xserver after the card reader is installed. No problem... probably a resourse conflict so you go into BIOS and knock the video memory from the default 64M to 32M. Problem solved. Enter machine B. Same machine, same scenerio. Except this time the Xserver just won't start period no matter what the video memory is set to. Who knows why? Certainly not SCO's tech support OR their joke of a knowledge base.

Example two. You've got your machine running like a champ so you do a Lone-Tar backup on DVD. Basically makeing an install disk that is a clone of your current setup. You build two more machines of identical make and model, from the Lone-Tar backup, but neither one of them runs like the first one. Sometimes you might get an ISAM error or httpd can't find it's SSL keys or some other nonsense. Remember the baseline platform is identical for all machines. Why does SCO act this way? I dont' know and neither does SCO.

Also they license the h3ll out of everything. TCP/IP for example is a separate license you have to buy from SCO NOT included with the Operating System. WTF over??

If I weren't forced to work with it I'd dump this POS Unix for some nice Sun equipment faster than you can spell IT.

Anyway, that's just for starters. Like I said. The stories I could tell you about SCO.:|

/rant
Click to expand...

I'm glad I've never had to work with it. :shocked:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top