I'm coding for class and when I try to compile I now get this error. Worked fine yesterday. IT does not work weekends so I'm out of luck until Monday unless someone can help. I'm fairly new to unix as I only really use it when coding.
cc scheduler.c
Close failure on scheduler.o : No space left on device
cc: acomp failed for scheduler.c
Delete some things on your disk. Use df (type 'man df' for usage) to see where the mount point is that you're compiling onto.
Check out the quota command. It'll show you how much space you get. You've probably just used up all the disk space you're allotted for you account. Go to your home directory:
> cd ~
and run:
> du -sh *
It will show how much space each of your directories takes up. Just remove some unused files.
If one directory takes up most of the space, you can cd into it and run du -sh * there too, to see the disk usage of its subdirectories. It's basically just a useful command for finding large files that you might not need anymore. For example, if you downloaded a really big program for a class project last year, but no longer need it, just rm it.
Related
Hello this my first question to StackOverflow, not sure about the forum and topic.
While participating in an Open Mainframe initiative using Visual Studio Code and Putty for Unix I developed a sample program in COBOL showing international sayings (german, english, french, spanish, latin for now). It works fine via batch with JCL to file and being called from REXX. In file I can't see special chars for non-english but I had a lucky punch with a twin-program in PL/1 (doing the same and showing the special chars in REXX).
Now my question: I also tried to call by mvscmd from Unix bash script. It works so far but dont show me the special chars. Ok I have last chance to call mvscmd from Python. Or alternatively I can transfer file from MVS to unix (for any reason then it automatically converts and I see my special chars contents).
Where is the place to handle it? Cobol? (as I said, for any reason PL/1 can do. I only use standard put edit in PL/1 vs display in Cobol). Converting the Sysprint/Sysout?
Any specialist can help me?
Hello and sorry for late replay. Well the whole code is a little bit much but I guess my problem is the following - MVSCMD direct coded in the shell script
#!/bin/sh
parm='Z08800.FYD.DATA'
#echo "arg1=>"$1"<"
[ ! -z "$1" ] && parm=$parm","$1
#echo "arg2=>"$2"<"
[ ! -z "$2" ] && parm=$parm","$2
#echo "parm=>"$parm"<"
mvscmd --pgm=saycob --args=$parm \
--steplib='z08800.fyd.load' \
--sysin=dummy \
--sysout=*
I have some more shell script but this is the main. I directly put it to sysout (its the COBOL diplay. I can use fixed string or my saying read from MVS file). When using PL/1 program the last file is then sysprint because PL/1 makes it by PUT EDIT.
I assume my codepage is pretty wrong. But I dont know how to repair. I used some settings in the shell but LANG remains on C ??? By the way this Unix seems to be quite old and I only have the chance to use it until August.
My main interest is to use the program on Mainframe and in JCL and/or REXX.
But they gave us chance with this embedded Unix (?) also so I wanted to try.
Direct Sysout from COBOL program to Unix terminal.
I meant when executing the program on the Mainframe and then watching the result file in ISPF (old stuff) editor by PF3 I can see German and Spanish and French special characters. So they are there seems, produced by COBOL and PL/1.
When transfering the MVS file (kind of PDS) into the UNIX by MVSCMD, it is also fine (special chars) but thats not what I wanted.
I tried to use Python instead flat shell but its going even worse. I cannot direct the Sysout to terminal, all what is Python able to call is on the Mainframe and with the MVS filesystem. So I have to transfer it after. It is to much overhead in my eyes when call say 7 sayings and I want them to be displayed in the Unix terminal lol.
Here is my REXX that is doing the trick
/* rexx */
ARG PARM1 PARM2
PARAMETER = '/Z08800.FYD.DATA'
If Length(PARM1) > 0
Then PARAMETER = PARAMETER","PARM1
If Length(PARM2) > 0
Then PARAMETER = PARAMETER","PARM2
PARAMETER = "'"PARAMETER"'"
Address TSO "Alloc File(sysprint) Dataset(*)"
Address TSO "Alloc File(sysin) Dummy"
Address TSO "Call fyd.load(saypli)" PARAMETER
Address TSO "Free File(sysprint)"
Address TSO "Free File(sysin)"
It is now the other Load, the PL/1 - but the COBOL does the same with Sysout instead of Sysprint.
It is shown in my REXX terminal that is also called by ISPF and then 3.4 in the edit panel. The program has no manual input but reads file. And yes, the sayings are not allocated here, I read them by dynamic allocation but it doesnt matter from where my strings come to the DISPLAY / PUT EDIT
And this now JCL. OK works little different, it stores to PDS member
//SAYCOB JOB
//COBCLG EXEC IGYWCLG,
// PARM.GO='Z08800.FYD.DATA'
// SET MBR=SAYCOB
//COBOL.SYSIN DD DSN=&SYSUID..FYD.SOURCE(&MBR),DISP=SHR
//LKED.SYSLMOD DD DSN=&SYSUID..FYD.LOAD(&MBR),DISP=SHR
//GO.SYSOUT DD SYSOUT=*
//*-------------------------------------------------------------
//*
//*-------------------------------------------------------------
//SAYCOB EXEC PGM=&MBR,PARM='Z08800.FYD.DATA,001,007'
//STEPLIB DD DSN=&SYSUID..FYD.LOAD,DISP=SHR
//SYSOUT DD DSN=&SYSUID..FYD.OUTPUT(&MBR),DISP=SHR
//*-------------------------------------------------------------
//LIST EXEC PGM=LINE80,PARM='/80'
//STEPLIB DD DSN=&SYSUID..FYD.LOAD,DISP=SHR
//SYSIN DD DSN=&SYSUID..FYD.OUTPUT(&MBR),DISP=SHR
//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=*
//
Here in the parameter I give them the library to my sayings and then I allocate by PL/1 or COBOL. I can of course show, but its a little bit much, about 200 lines... The problem is not MVS I guess but the Unix codepage.
Seems that there is no standard functions to get used/free/total of Disk space in Common Lisp.
There is statvfs.h in Linux/Mac and GetDiskFreeSpaceEx function in Windows for C/C++.
Personally, it would call an executable to do that using a library.
Calling df -h with IOLib for example.
But this is not portable (particularly IOLib, but there are other libraries), and you have to parse the output of the commands.
That's one reason I love programs which have "machine readable" outputs: you can glue them up programmatically (à la shell script).
Another way would be to actually call these c function, using cffi or uffi (ffi standing for foreign function interface), but I haven't used neither, so I can't say much about it.
Oh, search on quickdocs.org, there is probably a library exactly for that, or maybe just to access the OS's API.
I wrote a new project cl-diskspace using statvfs to get disk total/free/available space in Common Lisp. Support Mac/Linux/Windows.
Update: 2015-07-11 now support Windows! Thanks to pjb, Guthur, Fare, |3b|
Install cl-diskspace with QuickLisp:
$ git clone https://github.com/muyinliu/cl-diskspace.git
$ cp -r cl-diskspace ~/quicklisp/local-projects/
Load cl-diskspace with QuickLisp:
(ql:quickload 'cl-diskspace)
Usage of cl-diskspace:
Get disk space information
(diskspace:disk-space "/")
Will get something like this:
127175917568
16509661184
16247517184
Means that the total space is 118.44G, free space is 15.38G and available space is 15.13G
Get disk total space
(diskspace:disk-total-space "/")
Will get something like this:
127175917568
Get disk free space
(diskspace:disk-free-space "/")
Will get something like this:
16509661184
Get disk available space
(diskspace:disk-available-space "/")
Will get something like this:
16247517184
I have a very large file (~10 GB) that can be compressed to < 1 GB using gzip. I'm interested in using sort FILE | uniq -c | sort to see how often a single line is repeated, however the 10 GB file is too large to sort and my computer runs out of memory.
Is there a way to compress the file while preserving newlines (or an entirely different method all together) that would reduce the file to a small enough size to sort, yet still leave the file in a condition that's sortable?
Or any other method of finding out / countin how many times each line is repetead inside a large file (a ~10 GB CSV-like file) ?
Thanks for any help!
Are you sure you're running out of the Memory (RAM?) with your sort?
My experience debugging sort problems leads me to believe that you have probably run out of diskspace for sort to create it temporary files. Also recall that diskspace used to sort is usually in /tmp or /var/tmp.
So check out your available disk space with :
df -g
(some systems don't support -g, try -m (megs) -k (kiloB) )
If you have an undersized /tmp partition, do you have another partition with 10-20GB free? If yes, then tell your sort to use that dir with
sort -T /alt/dir
Note that for sort version
sort (GNU coreutils) 5.97
The help says
-T, --temporary-directory=DIR use DIR for temporaries, not $TMPDIR or /tmp;
multiple options specify multiple directories
I'm not sure if this means can combine a bunch of -T=/dr1/ -T=/dr2 ... to get to your 10GB*sortFactor space or not. My experience was that it only used the last dir in the list, so try to use 1 dir that is big enough.
Also, note that you can go to the whatever dir you are using for sort, and you'll see the acctivity of the temporary files used for sorting.
I hope this helps.
As you appear to be a new user here on S.O., allow me to welcome you and remind you of four things we do:
. 1) Read the FAQs
. 2) Please accept the answer that best solves your problem, if any, by pressing the checkmark sign. This gives the respondent with the best answer 15 points of reputation. It is not subtracted (as some people seem to think) from your reputation points ;-)
. 3) When you see good Q&A, vote them up by using the gray triangles, as the credibility of the system is based on the reputation that users gain by sharing their knowledge.
. 4) As you receive help, try to give it too, answering questions in your area of expertise
There are some possible solutions:
1 - use any text processing language (perl, awk) to extract each line and save the line number and a hash for that line, and then compare the hashes
2 - Can / Want to remove the duplicate lines, leaving just one occurence per file? Could use a script (command) like:
awk '!x[$0]++' oldfile > newfile
3 - Why not split the files but with some criteria? Supposing all your lines begin with letters:
- break your original_file in 20 smaller files: grep "^a*$" original_file > a_file
- sort each small file: a_file, b_file, and so on
- verify the duplicates, count them, do whatever you want.
Fork is a great tool in unix.We can use it to generate our copy and change its behaviour.But I don't know the history of fork.
Does someone can tell me the story?
Actually, unlike many of the basic UNIX features, fork was a relative latecomer (a).
The earliest existence of multiple processes within UNIX consisted of a few (fixed number of) processes, one per terminal that was attached to the PDP-7 machine (b).
The basic idea was that the shell process for a given terminal would accept a command from the user, locate the program file, load a small bootstrap program into high memory and jump to it, passing enough details for the bootstrap code to load the program file.
The bootstrap code, after loading the program into low memory (overwriting the shell), would then jump to it.
When the program was finished, it would call exit but it wasn't like the exit we know and love today. This exit would simply reload the shell and run it using pretty much the same method used to load the program in the first place.
So it was really more like a rudimentary exec command, the one that replaces your current program with another, in the same process space.
The shell would exec your program then, when your program was done, it would again exec the shell by calling exit.
This method was similar to that found in many other interactive systems at the time, including the Multics from whence UNIX got its name.
From the two-way exec, it was actually not that big a leap to adding fork as a process duplicator to work in conjunction. While many systems run another program directly, it's this "just add what's needed" method which is responsible for the separation of duties between fork and exec in UNIX. It also resulted in a very simple fork function.
If you're interested in the early history of various features(c) of Unix, you cannot go past the article The Evolution of the Unix Time-Sharing System by Dennis Ritchie, presented at a 1979 conference in Australia, and subsequently published by AT&T.
(a) Though I mean latecomer in the sense that the separation of the four fundamental forces in the universe was "late", happening some 0.00000000001 seconds after the big bang.</humour>.
(b) Since a question was raised in a comment as to how the shells were originally started off, there's a great resource holding very early source code for Unix over at The Unix Heritage Society, specifically the source code archives and, in particular, the first edition.
The init.s file from the first edition shows how the fixed number of shell processes were created (slightly reformatted):
...
mov $itab, r1 / address of table to r1
1:
mov (r1)+, r0 / 'x, x=0, 1... to r0
beq 1f / branch if table end
movb r0, ttyx+8 / put symbol in ttyx
jsr pc, dfork / go to make new init for this ttyx
mov r0, (r1)+ / save child id in word offer '0, '1, etc
br 1b / set up next child
1:
...
itab:
'0; ..
'1; ..
'2; ..
'3; ..
'4; ..
'5; ..
'6; ..
'7; ..
0
Here you can see the snippet which creates the processes for each connected terminal. These are the days of hard-coded values, no auto detection of terminal quantity involved. The zero-terminated table at itab is used to create a number of processes and hopefully the comments from the code explain how (the only possibly tricky bit is the labels - though there are multiple 1 labels, you branch to the nearest one in a given direction, hence 1b means the closest 1 label in the backwards direction).
The code shown simply processes the table, calling dfork to create a process for each terminal and start getty, the login prompt. The getty program, in turn, eventually started the shell. From that point, it's as I described in the main part of this answer.
(c) No paths (and use of temporary links to get around this limitation), limited processes, why there's a GECOS field in the password file, and all sorts of other trivia, generally interesting only to uber-geeks, of course.
I'm looking for the equivalent of right clicking on the drive in windows and seeing the disk space used and remaining info.
Look for the commands du (disk usage) and df (disk free)
Use the df command:
df -h
df -g .
Option g for Size in GBs Block and . for current working directory.
I love doing du -sh * | sort -nr | less to sort by the largest files first
If you want to see how much space each folder ocuppes:
du -sh *
s – summarize
h – human readable
* – list of folders
Note: The original question was answered already, but I would just like to expand on it with some extras that are relevant to the topic.
Your AIX installation would first be put into volume groups. This is done upon installation.
It will first create rootvg (as in root volume group). This is kinda like your actual hard drive mapped.
This would be equivalent to Disc Management in Windows. AIX wont use up all of that space for its file systems like we tend to do it in consumer Windows machines. Instead there will be a good bit of unallocated space.
To check how much space your rootvg would have you use the following command.
lsvg rootvg
That would stand for list volume group rootvg. This will give you information like the size of physical partitions (PP), Total PPs assigned to the volume group, Free PPs in the volume group, etc. Regardless, the output should be fairly comprehensive.
Next thing you may be interested in, is the file systems on the volume group. Each file system would have certain amount of space given within the volume group it belongs to.
To check what file systems you got on your volume group you use the following command.
lsvgfs rootvg
As in list volume group file systems for rootvg.
You can check how much space each file system has using the following command.
df
I personally like to refine it with flags like -m and -g (in megabytes and gigabytes respectively)
If you have free space available in your volume group, you can assign it to your file systems using the following command.
chfs -a size=+1G /home
As in change file system attribute size by adding 1 G where file system is /home. use man chfs for more instructions. This is a powerful tool. This example is for adjusting size, however you can do more with this command than that.
Sources:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/aix/library/au-rootvg/
+ My own experience working with AIX.
All these answers are superficially correct. However, the proper answer is
apropos disk # And pray your admin maintains the whatis database
because asking questions the answers of which lay at your fingertips in the manual wastes everybody's time.
su -sm ./*
You can see every file and folder size (-sm=Mb ; -sk=Kb) in the current directory like a list. This way runs in all Unix/Linux environment.
du -sm * => RULLLLLEZ
df -tk
for Disk Free size in 1024 byte blocks