So I have a series of thousands of .zip files that need to be opened.
They are password protected, but I have the passwords.
Trying to automate the opening of these. the deflate64 issue is causing a lot of pain.
Okay, So deflate64 is proprietary which is annoying as that stops you from using the normal zipfile library in python. As a workaround i typically make a subprocess call to 7zip or similar. So something like:
import subprocess, sys
subprocess.Popen(["7z", "e", f"{filename}", f"-o{destination}", "-y" "-p" password])
Then naturally just run that in a loop over your files. Depending on how they are laid out you might want to just glob everything in a directory or pipe them via stdin etc.
Often tasks like this are well suited to shell scripts so you might want to consider that, I'm not a windows user but i think something like the following script would work as well:
#echo off
set pass=[password]
set folder=[folder]
for /R "%folder%" %%I in ("*.zip") do (
"C:\somedirectory\7z.exe" x -p%pass% -y -o"%%~dpI" "%%~fI"
)
Related
TLDR; Convert the bash line to download sftp files get Inbox/* to c++ or python. We do not have execute permissions on Inbox directory.
I am trying to read the files present in a directory in a remote server through SFTP. The catch is that I only had read and write permissions on the directory and not execute. This means any method that requires opening (cding) into the folder would fail. I need to read the file names since they are variable. From what I understand ls does not require execute privs. If I can get a list of files in the directory then reading then would be fine. Here is the directory structure:
Inbox
--file-a.txt
--file_b.txt
...
I have tried libssh but sftp_readdir required a handle of the open directory. I also looked at paramiko for python but that too requires to open the directory to read the file names.
I am able to do this in bash using send "get Inbox/* ${destination_dir}". Is there anyway I can use a similar pattern match but on c++ or python?
Also, I cannot execute bash commands through my binary. Does anyone know of any library in python or c++ (preferred) that would support this?
I have not posted here in a while so please excuse me if I am not following the formatting. I will learn from your suggestions. Thank you!
my scenario is: I'm using vim to open some .cpp files, for example
vim 1.cpp src/2.cpp root/src/3.cpp
Sometimes, I wish to rebuild 3.cpp so I have to use another window to
"rm root/src/3.o"
and inside vim, type
":make"
This works fine, NP. But I am looking for a .vimrc function/command that:
When I switch to buffer, e.g. "root/src/3.cpp" and press this command, vim will detect the directory of "root/src" and the file name without suffix "3", and automatically execute a command of "rm root/src/3.o".
In this case, I can casually switch to any buffer and re-trigger the build of this very file.
Note I don't wish to map gmake tool command like "make clean" because we use several different make utilities like scons, cmake, etc.
So how to write this function/command in .vimrc? Thanks.
:call system('rm '.expand('%:p:r')) as #Kent said, or even simply :!rm %:p:r.
But I'm quite surprised you need to do that. Tools in charge of compilation chains usually understand dependencies (which ever the tool is), and you shouldn't need to remove the object file that often to need a mapping to do it for you.
PS: it's perfectly possible (but I need to update the doc) to support CMake, or out-of-source compilation from vim. But indeed, with out-of-sources compilation, you wouldn't need to delete those files manually, a :make clean if :make already works.
you can get root/src/3 from root/src/3.cpp buffer by:
expand('%:p:r')
Then you are free to concatenate the .o to end, and build the command.
In Question 2918898, users discussed how to avoid caching because
modules were changing, and solutions focused on reloading. My question is
somewhat different; I want to avoid caching in the first place.
My application runs on Un*x and lives in /usr/local. It imports a
module with some shared code used by this application and another.
It's normally run as an ordinary user, and Python doesn't cache the
module in that case, because it doesn't have write permission for that
system directory. All good so far.
However, I sometimes need to run the application as superuser, and then
it does have write permission and it does cache it, leaving unsightly
footprints in a system directory. Do not want.
So ... any way to tell CPython 3.2 (or later, I'm willing to upgrade)
not to cache the module? Or some other way to solve the problem?
Changing the directory permissions doesn't work; root can still write,
root is all-powerful.
I looked through PEP 3147 but didn't see a way to prevent caching.
I don't recall any way to import code other than import. I suppose I
could read a simple text file and exec it, but that seems inelegant
and bug-prone.
The run-as-root is accomplished by calling the program with sudo in a
shell script, and I can have the shell script delete the cache after the
run, but I'm hoping for something more elegant that doesn't change the
directory's last-modified timestamp.
Implemented solution, based on Wander Nauta's answer:
Since I run the executable as a plain filename, not as python executablename, I went with the environment variable. First, the
sudoers file needs to be changed to allow setting environment
variables:
tom ALL=(ALL) SETENV: NOPASSWD: /usr/local/bkup/bin/mkbkup
Then, the invocation needs to include the variable:
/usr/bin/sudo PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE=true /usr/local/bkup/bin/mkbkup "$#"
You can start python with the -B command-line flag to prevent it from writing cached bytecode.
$ ls
bar.py foo.py
$ cat foo.py
import bar
$ python -B foo.py; ls
bar.py foo.py
$ python foo.py; ls
bar.py foo.py __pycache__
Setting the PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE environment variable to a non-empty string or the sys.dont_write_bytecode to True will have the same effect.
Of course, I'd say that the benefits in this case (faster loading times for your app, for free) vastly outweigh the perceived unsightliness you were talking about - but if you really want to disable caching, here's how.
Source: man python
Let's imagine we have some script 'm12' (I've just invented this name) that runs
on Linux computers. If it is situated in your $PATH, you can easily run it
from the console like this:
m12
It will work with the default parameters. But you can customize the work of
this script by running it something like:
m12 --enable_feature --select=3
It is great and it will work. But I want to create a config file ~/.m12rc so I
will not need to specify --enable_feature --select=3 every time I run it.
It can be easily done.
The difficult part is starting here.
So, I have ~/.m12rc config file, but I what to start m12 without parameters that
are stored in that config file. What is the Unix way to do this? Should I run
script like this:
m12 --ignore_config
or there is better solution?
Next. Let's imagine I have a config file ~/.m12rc and I want some parameters from that
file, but want to change them a bit. How should I run the script and how the
script should work?
And the last question. Is it a good idea for script to first look for .m12rc
in the current directory, then in ~/ and then in /etc?
I'm asking all these questions because I what to implement config files in my
small script and I want to make the correct decisions about the design.
The book 'The Art of Unix Programming' by E S Raymond discusses such issues.
You can override the config file with --config-file=/dev/null.
You would normally use the order:
System-wide configuration (/etc/m12/m12rc, or just /etc/m12).
User's personal configuration (~/.m12rc)
Local directory configuration (./.m12rc)
Command-line options
with each later-listed item overriding earlier listed items. You should be able to specify the configuration file to read on the command line; arguably, that should be given precedence over other options. Think about --no-system-config or --no-user-config or --no-local-config. Many scripts do not warrant a system config file. Most scripts I've developed would not use both local config and user config. But that's the way my mind works.
The way I package standard options is to have a script in $HOME/bin (say m12a) that does it for me:
#!/bin/sh
exec m12 --enable_feature --select=3 "$#"
If I want those options, I run m12a. If I want some other options, I run raw m12 with the requisite options. I have multiple hundreds of files in my personal bin directory (about 500 on my main machine, a Mac; some of those are executables, but many are scripts).
Let me share my experience. I normally source config file at the beginning of the script. In the config file I also handle all the parameter switches:
DEFAULT_USER=blabla
while getopts ":u" do
case $opt in
u)
export APP_USER=$OPTARG
;;
esac
done
export APP_USER=${APP_USER-$DEFAULT_USER}
Then within the script I just use variables, this let me to have number of script having same input parameters.
In your case I imaging you would move "getopts" section to script and after it source the config file (if there was no switch to skip sourcing).
You should not put yours script config file to etc, it will require root privilidge to do that, and you simple can live with config file in home.
If you would like anyway to put your script for sharing with other users, it should go to /usr/share...
Another solution use thor (ruby gem), its way simpler to handle input parameter, avoiding work to get same result in bash e.g. getopts support only single letter switches.
I'm trying to make a script that hides some icons on desktop. When I run it line by line in command promt it works, but when I run the *.bat file in cmd it says "attributesi was unexpected at this time."
Here is the code:
set address=file.ext
set attributes=attrib %address%
for /F "tokens=*" %i in ("%attributes%") do set var=%i
set var=%var: =%
if %var:~1,1%==H (attrib -H %address%)else (attrib +H %address%)
Try this:
for /F "tokens=*" %%i in ("%attributes%") do set var=%%i
The for loop variables need %% instead of % when run in a batch file. But from the command line, % works just fine.
If you need any additional help with batch files, you should check out Rob van der Woude's pages on batch file scripting. It's a very rich resource on a language that's becoming increasingly difficult to find information on.
Speaking of which, I feel compelled to mention that Powershell scripting has largely replaced DOS batch file scripting (and for good reason). Almost anything you can do in a DOS batch file, you can now do easier in a Powershell script. Definitely worth checking into if you plan on doing more Windows-based scripting.
Hidedesktopicons.exe wasn't doing anything for me, but link that is given actually works. http://www.actualtools.com/forum/read.php?FID=8&TID=1072