[00:03] hi. do you know any way of detecting and configure the NIC briefly. ( i did a basic installation on other machine and installed openssh, then moved the hard drive to the one where i don't have any access to display. I can't get it to connetc to the network. So i believe it's necessary to detect the network card again, on this machine. === slank is now known as slank_away [00:06] MraAlbertina: could be, check /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules and /etc/network/interfaces -- hopefully there're some details in those [00:07] sarnold: hi :) i don't have access to the machine... but i can login, pass and then issue commands - but no display [00:08] i just login, pass then sudo reboot pass ... and it did it [00:08] MraAlbertina: hahaha, wow, what a kick. :) [00:08] :) [00:09] MraAlbertina: the udev rules file has a comment that says it was autogenerated by /lib/udev/write_net_rules [00:09] so, i believe if i force to recognize the new nic it might work, with sort commands [00:09] sort/short [00:10] bleh, reading /lib/udev/write_net_rules doesn [00:11] so... the only way might be to write a file in a pen and copy it over the one in there [00:11] doesn't give many hints to its correct use. pff. [00:11] or moving the hard drive back to the installation box... a big pain :( [00:11] MraAlbertina: try just a bare "/lib/udev/write_net_rules", then reboot, and see what happens? :) [00:12] okay [00:12] where could i get a copy of it, you know? [00:13] don't worry if is too much work for you, i'll find it [00:13] MraAlbertina: it's in the 'udev' package; if it isn't installed yet, it might not even be the right track.. [00:14] sarnold: i can't see what's installed, that's the problem. [00:14] it's ok. tomorrow i'll try to install in a different way [00:14] *snort* dpkg -l udev && reboot .... [00:15] snort? :o [00:15] if it reboots, it was installed :) [00:15] okokok [00:15] there's gotta be some better way to get boolean status out of a machine than a reboot.... [00:18] sarnold: it's fine, that's a new installation so no problem with running servers [00:19] there are no running servers anyway, it was a basic install [00:22] no... didn't reboot. tried 3 times :( so it means no changes [00:28] the wireless led is on. i think there is a way of making a temp connection to wan. if so i'll ssh and change everything [00:28] i didn't cinfigure wireless during the installation... [00:28] conf* === cpg is now known as cpg|away === cpg|away is now known as cpg [03:32] hello. I'm trying to resize a 1997Gb ext4 partition down to 1996Gb, I need the extra space for drbd metadata. Issue i'm running into is that every time I try running `resize2fs /dev/sdb 1996G` I get told that the requested size is larger than the number of blocks for the whole drive [03:32] what am I doing wrong? [03:33] Free99: /dev/sdb [03:34] Free99: it should probably be a partition, e.g. /dev/sdb1 or /dev/sdb2 or similar [03:34] so it should be /dev/sdb1 [03:34] ok [03:34] how's the projcet going otherwise? :) [03:35] last step before I start syncing, the other server is ready to sync with this one via drbd. pretty psyched [03:35] awesome :D [03:36] sarnold: so I ran `resize2fs /dev/sdb1 1996G` and it says, "The containing partition (or device) is only 487584768 (4k) blocks. [03:36] You requested a new size of 523239424 blocks." [03:36] meanwhile cfdisk tells me that sdb1 is 1997.21 gigs [03:37] Free99: can you interact with the programs using units of kilobytes? the 1000 vs 1024 mega and giga stuff would terrify me to no end === cpg is now known as cpg|away [03:37] I guess that makes sense hahaha [03:38] is there a difference between sector size & blocks? [03:40] Free99: well.... most <2TB drives use 512 byte sector sizes / blocks (though I think they use 540 bytes on disk, what with error correcting codes...) -- but some new, large, drives use 4k sectors. or so I've heard. [03:41] sarnold: interesting b/c the response it's giving me mentions 4k [03:41] 4k=4096 or 4000? [03:41] Free99: 4096 [03:41] or at least I think the 1000 vs 1024 insanity never reached the kilobyte level :) [03:43] I just re-read the man page for resize2fs, the author is pretty funny when he mentions that everything is in base 2 [03:43] gibibytes (facepalm) === cpg|away is now known as cpg [03:46] Free99: it's actually -standardized-. *sigh* :) [03:47] hey ubuntu-server [03:48] i've got a server running a web app of mine. the app can be reached in the browser and stuff, but I can't ping google or anything when I ssh into the box. what could cause this? [03:49] missing or incorrect default gateway or DNS servers [03:50] can you ping ip addresses? [03:50] let's see... [03:51] sarnold: yeah, i can ping google's ip [03:51] marshall: yay :) that's probably dns then. check /etc/resolv.conf and /etc/nsswitch.conf (rare for that one to break..) [03:51] howdy gents ! [03:51] greetings from Uruguay ! === stooj_ is now known as stooj [03:52] qman__: i'm not the one hosting the server, i'm the dev. the host said they would implement ssl for us sometime today, and I'm pretty sure they messed it up, but I don't know how they could have messed it up to this point. they generated a key and cert file. [03:54] sarnold: everything looks normal in those files [03:54] sarnold: I got it resized, sweet! [03:54] Free99: awesome :D [03:54] but now what? [03:55] can I just mount it or do I have to do anything? [03:55] Free99: do whatever that drbd syncy thing you were going to do? :) [03:55] Free99: wellllll, I'd probablybe inclined to fsck. got an hour? :) [03:56] hmmm. my entire department's VM disk repo, or waiting a little while. hmmm. [03:56] they're backed up though [03:56] sarnold: someone was mentioning that I have to delete the partition and then recreate it [03:56] is that true? [03:57] stgraber: you know, i just built your ppa's lxc (not the pending one, the one with logfile changes) and lxc-info works fine for me [03:58] ah [03:58] it's a permission thing! [03:58] sudo lxc-info works, lxc-info does not [03:58] sarnold, qman__: what do you know, the host screwed up the DNS outside the server. Thanks for your help, gentlepersons. [03:58] Free99: that was escott; his advice sounded good to me, or at least resizing the partition to match reality, made sense to me. but I've not done what you're doing. :) [03:58] marshall: woot. nice. :) [03:58] cripes man, that's what really has me nervous lol [03:59] Free99: I did a resize once, a decade back, using lvm. I was terrified to run that resize2fs command, but it all worked in the end. [03:59] stgraber: heh i'll have to think about that [04:00] i might just say "screw it, that means we wait until we have unprivileged containers" [04:00] * hallyn goes to put his chin on his fist in a thinking pose [04:00] that might be a long wait :) [04:00] Free99, sarnold im here, but i can't promise to remember what i said earlier [04:00] escott: I've got it in /lastlog if it'd be helpful :) [04:01] Free99, you were shrinking some partitions right? [04:01] < escott> Free99, the steps for something like that are usually (a) resize2fs (b) fsck (c) mount to make sure (d) umount (e) write down the partition begin and end address in LBA and CHS if you have got it (f) back up the table (g) modify the table deleting partition if needed (h) recreate the table (i) remount [04:01] escott: you mentioned fsck'ing the resized partition, check the data was still there, then resize the partition by noting the start and end [04:01] sarnold, thanks [04:02] Free99, there are two instances where the size of the partition are recorded. one in the filesystem and one in the partition table [04:02] stgraber@castiana:~$ sudo lxc-info -n qatracker01 [04:02] lxc-info: could not build log path [04:02] hallyn: ^ [04:02] Free99, you want to always ensure that the partition table entry is larger than the filesystem entry [04:02] stgraber: that's not the error I get [04:02] stgraber: I get lxc-info: failed to open log file "/var/lib/lxc/r1/r1.log" : Permission denied [04:02] Free99, so after you resize2fs you can then shrink the table entry to match the filesystem [04:03] Free99, tools like gparted would do that on your behalf [04:03] escott: that doesn't make sense, wouldn't you want to limit the size in software before you got your butt kicked by the hardware? [04:03] escott: doing this on ubu server, no X11 [04:03] hallyn: I get the same error as root and non-root. Let me strace it, see what's going on. [04:03] escott: I realized they are both software lol [04:04] Free99, that is what i am describing. you limit in software (resize2fs so that the ext2 partition knows it should be smaller) and then you limit in "hardware" (cut off part of the disk with the table) [04:04] Free99, you just dont want a situation where ext2 would be trying to write to a location which would be beyond the end of /dev/sda7 or whatever the partition device is [04:04] escott, now that i've resize2fs'd this mother, how do I change the partition? I was tinkering with cfdisk a little [04:05] Free99, since you shrank you are now safe in that ext2 will never touch the bits at the end of the partition device, so you can shrink the device itself [04:05] hallyn: strace doesn't show anything useful, so it fails before it tries to access/create something [04:05] Free99, a tool like parted might allow you to shrink the partition in place, alternately you delete the entry/table and recreate in place (and then fix up UUIDs since they might be regenerated) [04:06] hallyn: and I get the same problem with lxc-stop and lxc-start so can't try with a freshly started container either [04:06] spooky thing though, I ran cfdisk /dev/sdb and it tells me there is nothing but free space [04:06] stgraber: then your build is different from mine. weird [04:06] Free99, might it be a gpt table? [04:06] stgraber: what version exactly? [04:06] hallyn: oh, would the fact that /var/lib/lxc is a symlink mess with your stuff? :) [04:06] Free99, does sudo parted -l /dev/whatever show msdos or gpt table type [04:06] yes it probably would [04:06] hallyn: 0.9.0~alpha2-0ubuntu1+b1~bzr1099-27~201301230251~raring1 [04:06] escott: nope, I ran it on /dev/sdb1 not sdb [04:06] so my bad again [04:06] hallyn: my /var/lib/lxc and /var/cache/lxc are symlinks to sub-directories of /home/ :) [04:07] yeah we've got the same versions [04:07] lemme try as a symlink into /mnt [04:08] stgraber: how long is the pathname then? [04:08] stgraber: no, /var/lib/lxc as symlink to /mnt/lxc doesn't cause any issues here [04:09] hallyn: my /var/lib/lxc/qatracker01/ once expanded would become /home/stgraber/data/vm/lxc/lib/lxc/qatracker01/ [04:09] escott: it's an msdos disk [04:09] a tiny bit shorter than that actually: /home/stgraber/data/vm/lxc/lib/qatracker01/ [04:10] escott: http://pastebin.com/A7nRB3y1 [04:11] I ran `resize2fs /dev/sdb1 487559168` to shrink the partition [04:11] Free99, and your next change is to the table which is /dev/sdb [04:11] Free99, not sdb1 as you already noted [04:12] so how do I do this without losing data? tried googling this but it doesn't seem really clear [04:14] Free99, see if you can use parted on the command line to shrink the partition. That would be the easiest [04:14] stgraber: that still works fine for me. (wtf?) [04:14] Free99, something like "sudo parted /dev/sdb" resize partition_number start end [04:15] how do I know what the end is? [04:15] Free99, it would be start+size [04:15] stgraber: hm. wait. I think I made the mistake I warned you about earlier : [04:16] Free99, in your case start+487559168 (making sure you have matching units everywhere) [04:16] escott: I changed the size of the partition by 25,600 4096-byte blocks [04:18] escott: so parted is saying the start is at 1049kB [04:18] I multiply that by 512 to get the start that I have to add to "start+487559168" [04:19] is that correct? [04:19] I'm sorry to be leaning on you like this [04:19] hallyn: the path length is the problem [04:19] hallyn: "p1" will work fine "a-long-name" won't [04:20] Free99, 487559168 is in what bytes? [04:21] I...guess so? [04:21] hallyn: 40 characters to the container path works, 41 doesn't (if that means anything to you) [04:21] escott: it's in 4k blocks [04:22] hallyn: also, "lxc-start -n abc" where "abc" doesn't exist, will still create the directory and logfile. We probably don't want that to happen if the container doesn't exist :) [04:22] Free99, so you shrank the disk from something like 1860GiB to 1859.9 GiB [04:23] right, only need about 100mb [04:23] really, 58.6mb by calculations [04:23] stgraber: your main failure is due to my typing 'sizeof' instead of 'strlen' :) [04:24] escott: but I rounded up [04:24] hallyn: (and me not spotting it in the review ;)) [04:24] stgraber: as for the logfile getting created, I'm actually not sure you can get what you want there, bc you want two conflicting things: [04:24] Free99, so by my calculation your new partition needs to run from [04:25] 1. if someone specified logdir as /var/log/lxc, you want /var/lgo/lxc to get created [04:25] 2. if someone specified /var/lib/lxc/container, you don't want that to get created :) [04:25] note, the container not existing is something that gets logged [04:25] Free99, 1049kB to 1950237721kB [04:25] Free99, but then this is where things get fun [04:25] i suppose this might mean Dwight can't get what he wants, [04:25] and we insist on using /var/log/lxc/container.log [04:25] that 1049kB might (and probably is) something like 1048.5 kB but is rounded up [04:25] but there is still the other problem - unprivileged users [04:26] unless we only default to the logfile for lxc-start and lxc-execute, and everything else defaults to console [04:26] hallyn: for the record, I really like the idea of having /var/log/lxc/.log and not /var/lib/lxc// Free99, so you might want to go into parted and type [04:27] Free99, "unit B; print" to and then do everything in bytes [04:27] hallyn: well, in my case, it was lxc-start creating the directory I didn't want, so having only lxc-start and lxc-execute do the logging won't really help there [04:27] yeah, took your value, mutiplied by 1024 then divided by 4096, its pretty close to what resize2fs says the partition got resized to [04:28] stgraber: no, those are separate issues, indeed that wouldn't help [04:29] stgraber: ok i might respond to your email tomorrow then - thanks for spottin gthis, sorry for the inconvenience [04:29] i thought i had it all figured out [04:29] (meddling kids) [04:29] hallyn: I think we need a sane fallback if the default log location isn't writable (where the fallback is likely to be no logging at all) and we'll just have lxc-create write a decent lxc.logfile when using a user namespace [04:29] Free99, and then add to the bytes reported by parted as the start the bytes reported by dumpe2fs on the device /dev/sdb1 [04:30] escott: so the value I get is 487559168*(4096/1024)=1,950,236,672 [04:30] thats in kB [04:31] hallyn: but yeah, I think we'll need to write down all the scenari and make sure we do something we think is sensible in all cases (offering enough flexibility so that distros can easily change the locations) [04:31] hallyn: anyway, talk to you tomorrow! [04:31] Free99, sure i may have typed a number wrong when i was putting it in the calculator. I would suggest you work in physical blocks or smaller because parted will round up/down [04:32] well I clucked up, typed dumpe2fs /dev/sdb1 and now ssh is getting mad at me, I can't press ctrl-c any faster [04:32] stgraber: yup, ttyl [04:32] Free99, so Bytes or 512Bytes not logical blocks (4k) [04:32] escott: just wanted to check that the numbers were close [04:34] Free99, you can safely round the size of the ext2 partition up, but you cannot miss that starting block [04:34] escott, roger that. [04:35] escott: how's this look? `(parted) (parted) resize 1 1049kB 1950236672kB` [04:37] hmm. getting a complaint about incompatible features on the partition [04:38] I already cleared out the journal [04:38] Free99, you disabled the journal? [04:38] tune2fs -O ^has_journal /dev/sdb1 [04:39] Free99, annoying that you would have to do that [04:39] Free99, i realize it probably would have been easier to do the whole resize operation inside parted. i was giving the quick overview last night before i signed off [04:40] escott, well it's still not working, not sure what features are stopping this [04:40] Free99, at this point parted should not care what kind of filesystem is on that partition [04:41] Free99, because it should be small enough, but it probably checks it anyways just to make sure its a safe operation and then pukes because of other non-journal features it cannot handle (maybe extents) [04:42] Free99, with another tool like fdisk you can just delete the partition and create a new one in the place left over [04:42] Free99, you just have to get it all lined up correctly [04:43] escott, erm. I'm kind of cool with just disabling features, resizing, then enabling. doesn't that seem more sensible? [04:43] longer though [04:43] Free99, disabling extents will be a time consuming operation and could result in corruption pretty easily [04:44] oh snap [04:44] Free99, i don't even know if you can disable all features... thats not usually the direction people go with features [04:44] Free99, you have your backups. i would just back up the table with sfdisk, and then use fdisk to delete the partition and create the new one in the right place [04:49] escott: so based on what the manual says, running sfdisk -d /dev/sdb > /root/sdb.out ought to work? [04:51] Free99, yes [04:52] Free99, then make sure everything on that device is unmounted before playing around with the partition table. if anything goes south you can reload the backup table you just made [05:03] escott: if I write the end of the partition table incorrectly, but the beginning is fine, will I lose any data? [05:03] beginning = 2048 bytes [05:04] Free99, it cant be short. otherwise its ok [05:06] ok phew [05:06] think I got it [05:06] one other question. how do I actually get my data onto the drbd? [05:06] since /dev/sdb1 is the disk device and /dev/drbd1 is the drbd thing... [05:08] woohoo! it worked! the resize part anyhow [05:08] thanks a million escott & sarnold [05:13] Free99, do fsck that partition again, then mount it read only and look around before final sign-off [05:14] I did, also re-enabled the journal [05:14] Free99, i dont know what the drbd thing is so... [05:14] Free99, and then fsck after you re-enable... basically fsck every time you do anything [05:15] but now that you have done it the painful way it should be much easier in the future [05:32] hey um escott [05:32] Free99, yeah [05:32] so I ran a e2fsck and it's saying the superblock or partition table is corrupt [05:33] Free99, well something isnt correct then [05:33] so should I restore the sfdisk dump? [05:33] was it clean after you changed the partition size? [05:34] or was it the change in partition size that caused the corruption? [05:34] "The filesystem size (according to the superblock) is 487558900 blocks [05:34] The physical size of the device is 445382656 blocks [05:34] " [05:34] if it was an issue with shrinking the partition then yes restore it [05:34] and then make the partition table the length evidently should be 487558900 blocks so verify thats what you said it would be [05:35] well I think the problem may have been with the resize2fs [05:35] partition table has to be larger than the resize2fs right? [05:35] so your partition start was 1049kB which is something like 2000+ blocks into the disk [05:36] so your end is going to be 2875 58 900 + 2000 = 2875 60 900 or so [05:39] so basically should I start with the resize2fs then do the partition table? [05:40] Free99, did the resize2fs not shrink the filesystem? [05:40] b/c it's talking about the superblock, which sounds like the 2fs tools more than a mess-up in fdisk [05:40] is 487558900 not the number of blocks you want? [05:41] but its saying the physical size of the device is 445382656 [05:41] blocks [05:41] so apparently I added a zero at the end [05:41] and its way larger than possible [05:41] Free99, the superblock number is what is coming from resize2fs. the physical is from fdisk [05:42] Free99, its possible you accidentaly grew the FS [05:42] Free99, so long as you never wrote to the disk you might not notice? seems strange though and fsck should have noticed that after the resize before the fdisk [05:43] I remember that the disk is 1997.21G [05:43] if each sector is 4096bytes, then... [05:44] Free99, 4kB would be a standard logical block size for the filesystem, but it could be other sizes [05:44] Free99, the disk will probably report a block size of 512B [05:46] hmm. ok, so how do I know where the problem lies? [05:46] is it with my fdisk or with my 2fs? [05:46] Free99, i dont know what you started with so i dont know for sure what to say [05:47] I started with resize2fs [05:47] 487558900 in 4kB blocks is 1859.9 GiB [05:47] yep, definitely messed up on the resize2fs [05:48] 445382656 in 4kB blocks is 1699 GiB [05:48] thats unfortunate b/c thats the slow one [05:51] dang man [05:51] I think the data is gone [05:52] Free99, did you restore the table with sfdisk? [05:53] sfdisk -O sdb.out [05:53] right? [05:54] Free99, its in the manpage "man sfdisk | grep -C5 -- -d" [05:55] oh phew! [05:55] it worked [05:56] good call bro [05:56] as long as you don't mount the disk read-write until it passes an fsck you should be ok [05:57] any reason I should pick e2fsck over fsck or vice-versa? [05:57] Free99, no. one will call the other [05:58] phew ok. passed fsck [05:59] files all seem to be there [06:00] think I ought to be ok to mount [06:01] Free99, as long as you are passing fsck you should be fine [06:07] guess I'll try this again tomorrow. Thanks for your help escott [06:08] Free99, alright goodluck [06:08] you rock man. peace [06:08] Free99, you've stumbled through the basic mistakes and recovery so it should be easier for you tomorrow === smb` is now known as smb [08:13] Hi all [08:13] hi [08:14] i've a question about selecting a version when i'm installing a package with ubuntu (the latest) [08:14] i need to install a specific older version of java (java version "1.6.0_22") [08:15] daffy|2: oracle java is not specifically supported from ubuntu repo [08:15] you have to do it urself :) [08:15] :) [08:16] so i have to compil this version [08:17] i use the openjdk on my second server, but it's running under centos [08:24] daffy|2: yes. do it yourself :) [08:29] thanks for help [08:36] Anyone know how to tell if "local application" in Java Visual VM is dangerous or not? [08:37] I'll try #javasec... === yofel_ is now known as yofel [09:51] I get this error when I deploy to my server: sudo: no tty present and no askpass program specified [09:51] my repo is in /var/git and gets deployed to /var/www [09:55] daniel_-: did you get anywhere with RequestTTY in ~/.ssh/config and/or NOPASSWD in sudoers? [09:56] daniel_-: I suppose another solution would be to change permissions so you don't need sudo [09:56] daniel_-: Or you could set a suitable askpass [09:56] nopasswd I havent tried yet === matsubara-afk is now known as matsubara [10:19] hey rbasak there is no config in ~/.ssh [10:19] daniel_-: by default there isn't one - you'll need to create it [10:20] on my server or my local computer? [10:20] Local computer. You might want to limit the entry to apply to only your server with a Host directive. And I'm not entirely sure that it'll work with git. sudoers NOPASSWD should work. It all depends on the approach you want to take [10:22] rbasak: thx Ill try this one now [10:27] rbasak: /Users/daniel/.ssh/config: line 4: Bad configuration option: RequestTTY [10:28] daniel_-: it needs to go under a Host stanza [10:28] daniel_-: Host my-server.example.com [10:28] daniel_-: RequestTTY yes [10:29] Host myhost [10:29] RequestTTY yes [10:29] /Users/daniel/.ssh/config: line 2: Bad configuration option: RequestTTY [10:30] /Users/daniel/.ssh/config: terminating, 1 bad configuration options [10:30] Not sure then, sorry [10:31] np. Ill try some of your other solutions [10:34] what would I add to visudo? I mean I run a deploy from my local computer which checks out /var/git/xxx and deploys to /var/www/xxx All files and folders belong to my user [10:35] there is no git user on my /etc/passwd [10:40] daniel_-: evidently your user is trying to do something as root by calling sudo as part of your deployment. If you want to stop the error this way, then either don't call sudo, or allow sudo to permit access as root without your password === cpg is now known as cpg|away [10:41] As an example, this line allows the ubuntu user to access root without a password: [10:41] ubuntu ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD:ALL [10:46] thx [10:49] for your help rbasak [10:50] now it works [11:18] I can't mount an encrypted drive, mount returns "NTFS signature missing" [11:23] jamespage: virtual host server installations do not include cpu-checker from 20130120 onwards. Is that intended? (virtual-host smoke tests failing with kvm-ok not being installed doe amd64) [11:25] it's used for rdiff-backup and I didn't expect it to be NTFS [11:25] not much experience in this area. Any reading suggestions appreciated [11:45] ... [12:40] jamespage: Daviey: reported a bug for the issue above ^ bug 1103982 [12:40] Launchpad bug 1103982 in ubuntu-meta "cpu-checker is not included in virtual host server installations from 20130120 onwards" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1103982 [13:13] Hello there! How do I know the script I put under /etc/cron.daily/ is being run every day? [13:13] The infos at https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CronHowto are a little out of date, as it seems. [13:18] LuizAngioletti: take a look at /var/log/syslog [13:19] done that. [13:19] don't you see a line like [13:19] It appears my script hasn't run, although I can see a line from cron at 6h25am this morning [13:19] oh [13:20] any ideas on why it wouldn't run? The perms and ownership are right. [13:20] and what said that line ? [13:21] ubuntu CRON[19838]: (root) CMD (test -x /usr/sbin/anacron || ( cd / && run-parts --report /etc/cron.daily )) [13:21] virusuy: ? [13:21] uhmm [13:22] create a new script, a easy one .. like a scripts who execute "ifconfig -a" and send the output to a plain file in /tmp [13:22] and see if that works [13:22] if it does.. then is something wrong with your script [13:23] my script takes some 30s to execute completely, could that be it? [13:23] cron doesn't want to wait, or something. [13:23] LuizAngioletti: nope.. [13:24] LuizAngioletti: that shouldn't be the problem [13:24] and what if the script runs properly by means of ./script.sh? [13:25] in your script, what do you do ?? [13:25] i mean [13:25] using commands ... like in terminal ? [13:26] or you execute instead of ifconfig -a ... /sbin/ifconfig -a [13:26] I use commands like in the terminal. [13:26] ok. [13:27] probably thats the problem [13:27] how? [13:27] i do not really know why [13:28] but sometimes, and in some cases..cron doesn't seems to have the right PATH to those commands [13:28] and thats the reason why if you run manually your script it works [13:29] So, I'd have to go... /sbin/ifconfig -a [13:29] absolute paths? [13:29] for everything? [13:29] or set the path at the beggining of the script [13:29] but i don't know if that's a "healty" practice [13:30] PATH=$PATH:blah/blah? [13:30] yes [13:30] or [13:30] you can set something like [13:30] well.. what you said seems good [13:30] =P [13:30] anyway, wait a few minutes to see if someone where can help you with an easy way [13:31] in fact help us :-P [13:33] virusuy: thanks for the insight though. [13:34] LuizAngioletti: you're welcome === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha === slank_away is now known as slank [14:45] Now that a lot of text has gone by... [14:45] why would a script not be run by anacron? [14:46] It runs perfectly as ./script.sh but it isn't run when under /etc/cron.daily/ or /etc/cron.hourly. [14:47] virusuy: it doesn't work to simply put the PATH=$PATH:/blah [15:04] virusuy: I don't really know why... but if I schedule my script to be run by "crontab -e", it gets run. If I simply put it under /etc/cron.hourly, it doesn't. [15:06] how did you put it under /etc/cron.hourly? just copy or symlink the script in? [15:06] RoyK: I copied it. === matsubara is now known as matsubara-lunch [15:07] LuizAngioletti: looks like /etc/crontab uses run-parts to run those [15:07] perhaps try manually [15:08] or use the crontab ;) [15:08] RoyK: That means that I can't simply put scripts under the .[period] directories? [15:08] How do the files already in there get executed and mine don't? [15:09] no idea [15:09] check the logs [15:09]