|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 127 responses total. |
twenex
|
|
response 61 of 127:
| 
May 31 00:28 UTC 2005 |
You might want to try "cd'ing" to the correct directory. Either use:
ftp> cd /R/NSS/nss-tnc/
ftp> put index.html
or cd to each directory in turn, then put. I've found that BSD versions of
Unix utilities (which is what your Mac uses, and no, it doesn't matter what
"BSD versions" means), are quite limited compared to their counterparts on
Linux. However, you can download the versions used on Linux distros (the GNU
tools) and put them on your Mac. Your mission, should you choose to accept
it, is to read:
http://snow.prohosting.com/guru4mac/opensource_sw_macosx_2k2.html
You may also want to check out the Gentoo on Mac OS X project.
(http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/macos-guide.xml)
(I find gentoo's portage much more easy to use than debian's apt-get. To use
the commandline apt-get tools, you must either know the exact name of the
package you're downloading, or browse through some [imho] unfriendly
text-based and gui-tools. portage puts directories for each of its packages
in directories (under /usr/portage on Gentoo Linux), which you can browse at
your leisure. Interestingly, portage was also inspired by the ports system
from BSD, on which MacOS is based.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 62 of 127:
|
May 31 00:48 UTC 2005 |
Thanks! I think I'll keep it simple, and cd to the directory with the file
(which is simpler than moving the file into the root directory, as I did).
I recall my first procedure working previously, however, so I wonder what
has gone wrong. I don't think I upgraded - although I did clean all
caches. Maybe that lost some links. Is there a cache I should leave alone?
|
twenex
|
|
response 63 of 127:
|
May 31 14:47 UTC 2005 |
Not that I know of.
|
blaise
|
|
response 64 of 127:
|
May 31 16:06 UTC 2005 |
The other answer is to use the extended form of the put command,
specifying different source and target names.
put index.html /path/to/index.html
|
rcurl
|
|
response 65 of 127:
|
May 31 17:32 UTC 2005 |
Too bad "help put" in ftp isn't more informative, like the man pages.
I'll try #64.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 66 of 127:
|
May 31 17:39 UTC 2005 |
Re #64: do you mean like ftp> put index.html /R/NSS/nss-tnc/index.html ?
This didn't work.
Changing directory also didn't work. It gave
ftp> cd /R/NSS/nss-tnc
550 /R/NSS/nss-tnc: No such file or directory
The problem seems to be with the specification of the root directory as /.
Is there a more specific way to specify the root?
|
blaise
|
|
response 67 of 127:
|
May 31 20:48 UTC 2005 |
Is /R/NSS/nss-tnc the path to where the file is on the Mac or where you
want to put it on the server? If the former, then you need to use 'put
/R/NSS/nss-tnc/index.html index.html'; if the latter then you first need
to create the subdirectories.
|
gull
|
|
response 68 of 127:
|
May 31 20:56 UTC 2005 |
Re resp:61: aptitude isn't too bad for browsing apt packages. dselect
and taskselect suck mightily. Dependency handling is still sometimes
confusing, though.
|
twenex
|
|
response 69 of 127:
|
May 31 22:46 UTC 2005 |
Actually, I prefer synaptic. In my experience, when you uninstall stuff with
aptitude, it also uninstalls a ton of stuff you DIDN'T want uninstalled along
with the stuff you *did*. If I were in to such monstrous bogosities, wouldn't
I be running Windows?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 70 of 127:
|
Jun 1 00:44 UTC 2005 |
Re #67: I think the point you raise is where the problem is. ftp> is on
the server to which I have "ftp'd", so that most commands apply to the
directory at that server. However drag-and-drop of a file in Mac OS X is
*supposed* to make the root directory referenced to the Mac directory. It
does, in fact, do this, if the file is in the Mac root directory. However
the problem is that a path instruction is not followed. That is, ftp> put
index.html works if I first put index.html in the Mac root directory, but
ftp> put /R/NSS/nss-tnc/index.html doesn't, even though the path from the
Mac root is properly specified.
I think I mentioned that ftp> put /R/NSS/nss-tnc/index.html index.html
did not work. Here, let me try it again...
ftp> put /R/NSS/nss-tnc/index.html index.html
local: /R/NSS/nss-tnc/index.html remote: index.html
229 Entering Extended Passive Mode (|||60791|)
150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for index.html
100% |*************************************| 3827 211.26 KB/s
00:00 ETA
226 Transfer complete.
3827 bytes sent in 00:00 (23.46 KB/s)
HEY! It worked this time. What the heck.....
Well, if this has solved the problem, then I thank you heartily.
|
twenex
|
|
response 71 of 127:
|
Jun 1 14:28 UTC 2005 |
Ah.
No worries.
|
gelinas
|
|
response 72 of 127:
|
Jun 5 09:40 UTC 2005 |
In #60 above, you report that
put /R/NSS/nss-tnc/index.html
doesn't work, with the error, "550 /R/NSS/nss-tnc/index.html: No such file or
directory", and in #66, you note that
put index.html /R/NSS/nss-tnc/index.html
didn't work, either. Note that in both cases, the remote path is the same as
the Mac path: "/R/NSS/nss-tnc/". I don't know which remote machine you are
using, but it seems unlikely that it would have a directory named
"/R/NSS/nss-tnc/".
I find the report that
put /index.html
worked to be curious: Do you have 'write' access to the root directory on
the receiving machine? More importantly, where did the file end up on that
machine?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 73 of 127:
|
Jun 5 17:51 UTC 2005 |
I noticed that also, that that path is not on the remote machine. It seems
to be a syntax problem. It appears it has to be <put [path/file] [file]>,
not <put [file] [path/file]>, as first suggested here.
I am already connected by SFTP to the ultimate directory on the remote
machine when I drag and drop the file I want to transfer. Given that ftp>
<put [path/file] [file]> works, I too am a little suprised that just put
/[file] works if the file is in the Mac root directory. Maybe I don't need
the file name in the path, but it doesn't hurt? I'll try that:
ftp> put /R/NSS/nss-tnc index.html
local: /R/NSS/nss-tnc remote: index.html
/R/NSS/nss-tnc: not a plain file.
Nope. The file name has to be part of the path.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 74 of 127:
|
Jun 20 20:07 UTC 2005 |
Is there a way to turn off the "suggestions" (prior urls) window that
comes up when entering a url or site ID at a site you have previously
visited, in Firefox? I couldn't find such an option in Preferences.
This annoying feature (to me) is worst on some sites that require your ID
and PW, and the suggested ID list obscures the PW entry box, so you *have*
to use the list to continue.
|
juicy
|
|
response 75 of 127:
|
Jun 30 00:32 UTC 2005 |
This is the menu layout in NS 7.0; FF should be similar but may not be
identical:
Preferences > Smart Browsing > Location Bar Autocomplete
If you don't want it to suggest anything, ever, uncheck the box; if you want
adjust the options, hit 'Advanced'.
If you're getting suggestions for information you're entering into forms
within pages, look for Privacy > Save Form Information and tell it not to;
you may also want to "Clear" saved information. Note also that if you just
keep typing, as the options for completions narrow, the list'll get shorter.
You should also be able to use the arrow keys to select an option and either
tab or enter to select it and move on to the next box (or not).
|
rcurl
|
|
response 76 of 127:
|
Jun 30 05:42 UTC 2005 |
(I though I had responded...but it's not here, so...) Thanks! I had not
thought that the form information preferences would be under Privacy. I
shouldn't have assumed anything when dealing with such applications.
|
twenex
|
|
response 77 of 127:
|
Jun 30 10:38 UTC 2005 |
But I thought the Mac was supposed to be intuitive and easy-to-use...
|
gull
|
|
response 78 of 127:
|
Jun 30 14:12 UTC 2005 |
The OS usually is. Third-party apps aren't always. Mozilla/Netscape,
like most open-source apps, isn't really known for a consistent and
well-thought-out user interface. Menu options even sometimes move
around between minor releases.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 79 of 127:
|
Jun 30 15:43 UTC 2005 |
Don't go overboard. The Mac OS X Help is pretty poor, not having explanations,
or even definitions, for many terms and procedures.
|
twenex
|
|
response 80 of 127:
|
Jun 30 17:42 UTC 2005 |
The OS usually is. Third-party apps aren't always. Mozilla/Netscape,
like most open-source apps, isn't really known for a consistent and
well-thought-out user interface. Menu options even sometimes move
around between minor releases.
Don't throw that "like most open-source apps" around TOO much. M$ changed
plenty between Windows 95 and 98, and between 2000 and XP, both minor
upgrades.
As for "third party apps aren't always", i thought there were supposed to be
Human Interface Gidelines, too...
|
juicy
|
|
response 81 of 127:
|
Jul 1 01:52 UTC 2005 |
sure there are, but when different programmers with different views on the
most usable or intuitive layout work successively (and often without much
communication) on a design, it'll change. Eventually it'll stabilise, but
it may take a while.
And don't be too sensitive about finding meaning where there wasn't any.
"like most open-source apps" doesn't exclude closed ones, it just means that
it's common among open ones. it's probably just as common among closed apps
with similarly large communities of uncommunicative developers.
|
twenex
|
|
response 82 of 127:
|
Jul 1 10:48 UTC 2005 |
True enough.
|
gull
|
|
response 83 of 127:
|
Jul 5 20:20 UTC 2005 |
Also, remember that Mozilla was originally written for Windows, then
ported to the Mac. That usually entails some compromises. It's hard to
satisfy the UI guidelines of both operating systems, especially since
people tend to expect an app to work the same on different platforms.
Open-source apps are getting better at UIs, but they have a ways to go.
GNOME certainly is better than it used to be. GIMP has improved
considerably in the 2.x releases; it used to be a great example of what
*not* to do.
|
twenex
|
|
response 84 of 127:
|
Jul 5 20:41 UTC 2005 |
Open-source apps are getting better at UIs, but they have a ways to go.
I think closed-source apps are getting worse. Mac used to have one interface
paradigm (two if you include desk accessories, which even before multitasking
could coexist with the single application on screen). Now it has two (three
by the latter criterion.) Add another for apps written by Microsoft (which
I hear always diverge from the Mac HIG). And another for text-based apps (such
as Terminal, telnet programs, and non-IDE-based programming tools).
As for Windows, there's one interface for (Windows) Explorer and one for My
Computer. Add another for Media Player. And another for WinAMP...
Since its inception, DOS/Windows has had no fewer than 9 major or minor
interface changes, including:
The change from tabbed to overlapping Windows in version <3.1
The addition of DOS Shell in DOS 4
The change to Program and File Managers in 3.x
The change to My computer and Explorer in 9x/NT 3.51 and up.
The cosmetic (but imho awful) change in Windows XP;
The cosmetic (and slightly nicer) putative change in Longhorn.
The ditching of components in Longhorn.
The addition of an allegedly decent command line shell in Longhorn;
The constant (and progressively stupider) interface changes in Control Panel.
Oh, AND some time soon, the change to a database filesystem.
Of course, KDE and GNOME have undergone various changes, too. But it's no
worse than Windows. Finally, MS have compounded the error by allowing you to
change to something that looks vaguely like the old interface at each turn,
and then keeping those options around. MS software is anything but simple or
consistent, unless you have been brainwashed into thinking it is, which they
seem to have been able to do with most people with an alarming degree of
success.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 85 of 127:
|
Nov 23 21:00 UTC 2005 |
Returning again to #59 inre the Cleaning function of OnyX.... the complete
error message I get whenever I run it is
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Error: 1
find: /private/_tmp_/printing.523/Preview of A video that never mentions
Heifer Project International shows why their premise is wrong - An Aticles
From The Heifer Project- A Bad Approach to Solving World Hunger Problems -
An All Creatures Animal Issues Article Series- justi#14D6A.prvw: No such
file or directory
find: /private/_tmp_/printing.523/Preview of A video that never mentions
Heifer Project International shows why their premise is wrong - An Aticles
From The Heifer Project- A Bad Approach to Solving World Hunger Problems -
An All Creatures Animal Issues Article Series- justi#14D6B.pset: No such
file or directory
find: /private/_tmp_/printing.523.1/ Preview of A video that never
mentions Heifer Project International shows why their premise is wrong -
An Aticles From The Heifer Project- A Bad Approach to Solving World Hunger
Problems - An All Creatures Animal Issues Article Series-
justi#14DF3.prvw: No such file or directory
find: /private/_tmp_/printing.523.1/ Preview of A video that never
mentions Heifer Project International shows why their premise is wrong -
An Aticles From The Heifer Project- A Bad Approach to Solving World Hunger
Problems - An All Creatures Animal Issues Article Series-
justi#14DF4.pset: No such file or directory
find: /private/_tmp_/printing.523.2/ Preview of A video that never
mentions Heifer Project International shows why their premise is wrong -
An Aticles From The Heifer Project- A Bad Approach to Solving World Hunger
Problems - An All Creatures Animal Issues Article Series- OK
--------------------------------------------------------------------
It appears that "Cleaning" is trying to find some files that are
not there. But why does it think they are there? Or am I misinterpreting
what the error message is trying to tell me? I certainly don't need/want
any files about "The Heifer Project".
I can find the directory /private/_tmp_/printing.523.1/ (etc), and it
contains all that gibberish, but why is this creating an error?
|