i have a file check placed at /home/abc. I want to read this file from a bundle running in karaf.
Location of that file is fixed. So, i can hardcode that. But i am not able to find a way for it.
one way- you need to copy the file into the /etc/ folder.
second way- you need to define JAVA_OPTS=-DprojectName="/directorypath/filename" into the /bin/karaf.bat or .sh file and restart the karaf.
write the code like this you are reading the file from
String s= System.getPropety("projectName/filename");
File f = new File(s);
Related
I have zip file containing my installation files. I'm extracting this zip and copying these files into installation directory with the script shown below:
ZipDLL::extractall "$OUTDIR\demo.zip" "C:\myapp\demo\"
if I remove zip file from $OUTDIR than installer is not able to find zip file as expected. What I want to do is embedding this zip or its extracted folders into exe itself. I added
File -r "$OUTDIR/demo"
but this script didn't worked as well.
When you use the ZipDll plugin, you are referring to the file you want to process (demo.zip) by using its place at run time: along the installer.exe.
When you use the File statement to embed some files into the produced installer, you need to refer to the files by using their place at compile time.
Replace the $OUTDIR in the File statement by the path relative to the .nsi script.
BTW, you should take the habit to check at the compilation log, NSIS probably tells you about that kind of problem when paths are incorrect at compile-time.
I've recently started to learn bash script and have started to create a file repository system. I have gotten pretty far and am able to add files, remove files. When I remove a file from the repository it actually leaves the file in but changes permissions so only the user that removed can use it, it then send a copy to there home area, it also changes the name of the file left behind to "$fileNameOUT"
I know plan to add a feature to my add function which checks after a file has been added if there is a file with the same name but with "OUT" at the end, if it finds this the old file will be sent to a back folder so files can be restored. I know I have to loop through the directory using a for loop, however the problem I'm having is I don't know how I can compare the file I have just added to all of the files in the directory.
I hope someone can make send of what I just wrote.
If you know the name of the file you are interested in, you can use the -e test to check if it exists.
if [ -e fooOUT ]
then
echo File exists
fi
I've finished a little useful script written in Bash, hosted on github. It's tested and documented. Now, I struggle with how to make it installable, i.e. where should I put it and how.
It seems other such projects use make and configure but I couldn't really find any information on how to do this for bash scripts.
Also I'm unsure into which directory to put my script.
I know how to make it usable by myself but if a user downloads it, I want to provide the means for him to install it easily.
There is no standard for this because most of the time, a project isn't a single script file. Also single file scripts don't need a build step (the script is already in an executable form) and configuration usually comes from an external config file (so no need for a configure script, either).
But I suggest to add a comment near the top of the file which explains what it does and how to install it (i.e. chmod +x + copy to folder).
Alternatively, you could create an installer script which contains your original script plus a header which asks the user where she wants to install the real script and which does everything (mkdir, set permissions with sudo, etc) but it really feels like overkill in your case.
If you want to make it installable so the package manager can easily install and remove (!) it, you need to look at the documentation for rpm or Debian packaging. These are the two most used package managers but they can't install a script per-user (so it would probably end up in /usr/bin)
instruct them to create a file named after the script in their home directory, chmod ug+x the file so it has executable permissions than put the script inside the file, don't forget the #!/bin/bash up top of the vim. This example is a script to copy a file, archive the copied file than remove the copied file leaving only the original file and the archived file.
#!/bin/bash
#### The following will copy the desired file
cp -r /home/wes/Documents/Hum430 /home/wes/docs
#### Next archives the copied file
tar -zcvf Hum430.tar.gz /home/wes/docs
#### and lastly removes the un-archived copy leaving only the original and the archived file.
rm -r /home/wes/docs
### run the file with ./filename (whatever the file is named)
I created a simple program that takes the path of a directory as an input, creates an archive of that directory (converting it into a single file), adds a shebang to that file (so that the contents of the file can be easily extracted), and writes the file to the base directory of the specified path.
The problem is that the file does not extract itself when I double click on it. Instead the operating system (I'm using Ubuntu 11.10) tries to open it with gedit. This obviously shows the shebang, random gibberish, and the contents of the archived files.
I made the file executable, first by using chmod +x; and when it still didn't work I tried chmod 777. However it still refuses to execute the file with the shebang when I double click on it. Perhaps this is because it's not a pure text file.
Interestingly when I try to execute the file directly from command line it reads the shebang and extracts the contents of the archive properly. So there's nothing wrong with my file format. I don't know much about what operating systems do when you double click on a file but I would sure like to understand.
It surely makes no sense to add a shebang to a file if you still need to manually execute it from the command line. One advantage could be that you don't need to specify the program to open it with but I believe that's hardly an advantage. Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Update 1:
The program that creates the archive is called opm. It can be installed via the node package manager using the following command:
npm install opm
After that you simply use opm to pack and unpack directories for you. For example if I have a directory called test in my home directory then I can open a terminal and execute the following command to pack it:
opm test
This will create an archive of the directory called test.pack in the home directory. The .pack file has the shebang #!/usr/bin/opm. Opening a file with the extension .pack with opm tells it that it's an archive and opm unpacks it in the same directory.
Note: Change the name of the test.pack file if you do not want it to overwrite your existing test directory.
I added the shebang to the .pack file so that it would extract itself when I opened it. However that doesn't seem to work. Nevertheless if I run one of the following command then it works:
./test.pack
You may check my source code and make any modifications to the program as you may wish to.
Update 2:
Alright I created the following .desktop file for opm and stored it in the $HOME/.local/share/applications/ directory:
[Desktop Entry]
Type=Application
Version=1.0
Encoding=UTF-8
Name=OPM
GenericName=Object Packer and Minifier
NoDisplay=true
Comment=JavaScript Package Manager
TryExec=opm
Exec=opm %f
Terminal=false
MimeType=application/opm
Now I was able to associate .pack files with opm by right clicking on a .pack file, going to the Properties window, the Open With tab, and setting opm.desktop as the default application. Now I am able to unpack a .pack file by simply opening it.
However I would like to know how to associate .pack files with the mime type application/opm. Currently the .pack files are associated with application/x-java-pack200. How do I do so? Is it better if I use a different extension (e.g. .opm)? By associating the packed archives with the mime type application/opm will the OS open them with opm by default without having to explicitly set a default application from Properties > Open With?
If there's already a MIME-type associated with .pack then you'll want to use a different extension (.opm) to associate with your MIME-type (application/opm). The way you automatically associate a program that opens files of a specific MIME-type is with xdg-mime .
Alternatively,
Edit ~/.local/share/applications/mimeapps.list and put your MIME/application combo under [Default Applications] like so:
[Default Applications]
application/opm=opm.desktop;
Place your opm.desktop file in ~/.local/share/applications/ folder. (You've already done this)
I am trying to read in from a few files using something like this
IO.foreach("TeamFields.txt") { |line| fieldNames.push(line.chomp) }
It works fine when running the from the command line, but when I package to an .exe with shoes and run it can't find the file. Is there a way to specify a path relative the the .exe or do I have to provide the full filepath (e.g. "c:\files\TeamFields.txt")? Thanks for the help.
This is because your executable is not run with the correct current directory.
Either fix the current directory (for example in the shortcut) or modify your Ruby program to automatically set the working directory to the program directory with:
Dir.chdir(File.dirname($PROGRAM_NAME))
You need to set "Current Application Directory" correctly before going relative.
The user can execute your app with different start up dir, or system can call your app with different dir.
If files in question are in the folder of your app, the only thing you need to do is to get that folder, and set it to be current.
I don't program in ruby, but I do with windows, and odds are the relative path will be based on the location of the .exe file.
So, yes, you're probably better off passing a full path for the file name.
The constant __FILE__ will contain the full path to the currently executing file. You can then use methods of the File class to strip off the filename, append the relative path for whatever other file in your package it is you want and resolve the result.