ffmpeg returning nonsense [closed] - console

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
I use this command
ffmpeg -i X.mpg -b 533k –vcodec h263 -ac 1 -ab 48k -acodec aac -strict experimental -s 352x288 X.3gp
from cmd to convert file X from mpg to 3gp. I even used this yesterday and it worked.
Today I decided to improve the command:
ffmpeg –i X.mpg -b 1000k –r 25 –vcodec h263 -ac 1 -ab 15750 –ar 8000 -acodec libopencore_amrnb -s 352x288 X.3gp
Now ffmpeg is completely screwed up, it returns garbage like
[NULL # 02EFF020] Unable to find a suitable output format for 'ÔÇôvcodec'
ÔÇôvcodec: Invalid argument
or
[NULL # 02CBEA80] Unable to find a suitable output format for 'ÔÇôi'
ÔÇôi: Invalid argument
even if I use the first command, which it worked and now, on the same file, in the same directory, with a new fresh ffmpeg executable from the same archive I extracted it before, it doesn't convert anymore.
If I type a nonexistent file as input, ffmpeg gives
[NULL # 02CBEA80] Unable to find a suitable output format for 'ÔÇôr'
ÔÇôr: Invalid argument
I really don't know what to do. Looks like something really basic has been changed...

The dash in –vcodec option is the wrong character (code 0x96, should be 0x2D). Delete and retype. That should fix the problem.

Related

How to delete line from file which matches string [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 1 year ago.
This post was edited and submitted for review 1 year ago and failed to reopen the post:
Original close reason(s) were not resolved
Improve this question
I have a file which contains below information-
SOURCE "defrust"
DESIGN "2_3"
SYSTEM SPICE
NETLIST SOURCE
NETS "NONE"
//NETS "NONE"
//VARIABLE "cell2"
DESIGN "hello one"
How can i use unix commands to delete full lines which are starting from SOURCE ,DESIGN and //
output be somewhat like-
SYSTEM SPICE
NETLIST SOURCE
NETS "NONE"
thanks in advance
Use this Perl one-liner:
perl -i.bak -ne 'print if !m{^(SOURCE|DESIGN|//)}' file_name
The Perl one-liner uses these command line flags:
-e : Tells Perl to look for code in-line, instead of in a file.
-n : Loop over the input one line at a time, assigning it to $_ by default.
-i.bak : Edit input files in-place (overwrite the input file). Before overwriting, save a backup copy of the original file by appending to its name the extension .bak.
^ : beginning of the line in regex.
SEE ALSO:
perldoc perlrun: how to execute the Perl interpreter: command line switches
perldoc perlre: Perl regular expressions (regexes)

Unix Utitliy du -b vs du -h [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I was using the unix utility du -h to check the file sizes of a text and a utf file. The man page says the -h --human-readable flag "print sizes in human readable format (e.g., 1K 234M 2G)". After reading the man page, I decided to try du -b. The man page says the -b --bytes flag is "equivalent to '--apparent-size --block-size=1'". What I understand is that du -b lists how many bytes are in the file.
The output of du -b is 122, but when running du -h on the same file I get 4.0K.
What does the K stand for? When looking at the man page it looks like it is supposed represent Kilobytes, but 122 bytes can't be 4 Kilobytes. What am I missing here?
The difference here has to do with block size of your filesystem. https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/62049/why-is-a-text-file-taking-up-at-least-4kb-even-when-theres-just-one-byte-of-tex gives a good answer.
The gist is that many filesystems reserve disk space in 4 kilobyte chunks. So, even if a file contains very few bytes of information, it'll take up 4K on the filesystem.
$ echo "foo" > foo
$ du -h foo
4.0K foo
The number of bytes of the contents of the file may be far less than 4K, like 122 bytes, but the file itself is taking up 4K on your filesystem.

how to find the number of occurence of a particular word from text file in unix [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I have a text file in which i have 17000 lines, example:
another instance started
another instance started
instance not started
bss instance started
like this.
I have to find the number of times the word 'another' is in printed in the above example my output should be 2. I need shell script command for the above example. Can any one help me with shell coding or command?
First you should try to search harder, the answer can be found easily.
Second:
grep -c another yourfilepath
Just use good old grep.
grep -c 'word' file
\<another\> is a word boundary and it won't match abcanother or anotherxyz etc.
grep -o '\<another\>' file.txt | wc -l
grep -c flip article.txt
10
See http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/2384
and http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/grep-regular-expressions/

Remove character from a File [closed]

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 8 years ago.
This question appears to be off-topic because it lacks sufficient information to diagnose the problem. Describe your problem in more detail or include a minimal example in the question itself.
Questions must demonstrate a minimal understanding of the problem being solved. Tell us what you've tried to do, why it didn't work, and how it should work. See also: Stack Overflow question checklist
Improve this question
Using UNIX Scripting it is possible to remove all the firsts characters from a file till a specific character is found ?
I have a file with "garbage" at the beginning. I want to remove that "garbage, meaning that all the character till the first "{" must be removed. How can I do this ?
cat file.txt | grep -A 1000000000 '{' | sed '1 s/^[^{]*//'
This will print the changed contents (i. e. without the garbage) to stdout. You can redirect this using > outfile.txt appended to the command:
cat file.txt | grep -A 1000000000 '{' | sed '1 s/^[^{]*//' > outfile.txt
And if you want to change the file in-place, this can be done by renaming the outfile.txt to the original name file.txt afterwards:
mv outfile.txt file.txt

Using the mv command - file deleted? [closed]

Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
This is probably a very stupid question, but is it possible that files can be deleted with the "mv" command?
I'm asking because I when I was attempting to move a file up to its parent directory, I accidentally typed one "." too many and now I can't find my file.
So instead of:
$ mv myfile.txt ..
I had put:
$ mv myfile.txt ...
Now my file is gone. Did I delete it accidentally, and is it possible to get it back at all?
Thanks!
Your file has been renamed to "..." do an ls -a to see dot files.
Try mv ... ../myfile.txt to get do what you originally wanted.
you file is now named as ..., check it with ls -al in your current dir.
On UNIX systems, file names starting with a dot are hidden from directory listings by default.
ls -lA
will display dot files.
You can rename the file back
mv ... myfile.txt
Your file is now called ... and is not visible thru the simple ls command.
Use ls -a to make "system" files (starting with a dot) visible or rename it back mv ... your_file.
And to answer the title-question:
Yes and no.
It' s not possible, but moving the file to /dev/null will delete it as well. :D

Resources