Search Results

Search found 7 results on 1 pages for 'piskvor'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • grep --exclude/--include syntax (do not grep through certain files)

    - by Piskvor
    I'm looking for the string "foo=" (without quotes) in text files in a directory tree. It's on a common Linux machine, I have bash shell: grep -ircl "foo=" * In the directories are also many binary files which match "foo=". As these results are not relevant and slow down the search, I want grep to skip searching these files (mostly JPEG and PNG images): how would I do that? I know there are the --exclude=PATTERN and --include=PATTERN options, but what is the pattern format? manpage of grep says: --include=PATTERN Recurse in directories only searching file matching PATTERN. --exclude=PATTERN Recurse in directories skip file matching PATTERN. Searching on grep include, grep include exclude, grep exclude and variants did not find anything relevant If there's a better way of grepping only in certain files, I'm all for it; moving the offending files is not an option, I can't search only certain directories (the directory structure is a big mess, with everything everywhere). Also, I can't install anything, so I have to do with common tools (like grep or the suggested find). UPDATES: @Adam Rosenfield's answer is just what I was looking for: grep -ircl --exclude=*.{png,jpg} "foo=" * @rmeador's answer is also a good solution: grep -Ir --exclude="*\.svn*" "pattern" * It searches recursively, ignores binary files, and doesn't look inside Subversion hidden folders.(...)

    Read the article

  • Differences in IE8 behavior between XP, Vista, Win7?

    - by Piskvor
    Is there any significant difference in behavior (HTML, CSS, Javascript, ...) with Internet Explorer 8 on different operating systems? In other words, will a web page work the same way across IE8+XP, IE8+Vista and IE8+Win7, or are there some significant differences? (I'm aware that installed plugins and fonts will have an impact, but that's a bit outside my scope at the moment; assuming compatibility mode X-UA-Compatible: IE=8 or edge) Although The IEBlog contains very useful information, I haven't found this data there - so I'm assuming that there should not be any difference. However, search has turned up this (vague) question: "IE8 on XP: looks great! IE8 on Vista: looks terrible". Will have to check IE8+{XP,V,7} in VM in the meantime.

    Read the article

  • How to abort shutdown in Windows (XP|Vista) programatically?

    - by Piskvor
    I want to be able to detect and abort OS shutdown from my application, preferably by using the Windows API. I know that it is possible to do this manually using the command shutdown -a In the worst case, I could ShellExecute this, but I was wondering if there was a better way. Also, how do I find out programatically that the OS is about to shut down, via the Win32 API?

    Read the article

  • Low-Hanging Fruit: Obfuscating non-critical values in JavaScript

    - by Piskvor
    I'm making an in-browser game of the type "guess what place/monument/etc. is in this satellite/aerial view", using Google Maps JS API v3. However, I need to protect against cheaters - you have to pass a google.maps.LatLng and a zoom level to the map constructor, which means a cheating user only needs to view source to get to this data. I am already unsetting every value I possibly can without breaking the map (such as center and the manipulation functions like setZoom()), and initializing the map in an anonymous function (so the object is not visible in global namespace). Now, this is of course in-browser, client-side, untrusted JavaScript; I've read much of the obfuscation tag and I'm not trying to make the script bullet-proof (it's just a game, after all). I only need to make the obfuscation reasonably hard against the 1337 Java5kryp7 haxz0rz - "kid sister encryption", as Bruce Schneier puts it. Anything harder than base64 encoding would deter most cheaters by eliminating the lowest-hanging fruit - if the cheater is smart and determined enough to use a JS debugger, he can bypass anything I can do (as I need to pass the value to Google Maps API in plaintext), but that's unlikely to happen on a mass scale (there will also be other, not-code-related ways to prevent cheating). I've tried various minimizers and obfuscators, but those will mostly deal with code - the values are still shown verbatim. TL;DR: I need to obfuscate three values in JavaScript. I'm not looking for bullet-proof armor, just a sneeze-guard. What should I use?

    Read the article

  • Fastest way to represent a collection of bits in PHP?

    - by Piskvor
    What is a good way to represent a collection of bits? I have a set of various on/off toggles (thousands of them) and need to store and retrieve their state. The naïve implementation would be an array of booleans, but I'm wondering if there's a better way (better in terms of access speed and/or memory requirements). I've found this BitArray implementation, but it's limited to 32 bits, which is not enough for this case.

    Read the article

  • Cookie blocked/not saved in IFRAME in Internet Explorer

    - by Piskvor
    I have two websites, let's say they're example.com and anotherexample.net. On anotherexample.net/page.html, I have an IFRAME SRC="http://example.com/someform.asp". That IFRAME displays a form for the user to fill out and submit to http://example.com/process.asp. When I open the form ("someform.asp") in its own browser window, all works well. However, when I load someform.asp as an IFRAME in IE 6 or IE 7, the cookies for example.com are not saved. In Firefox this problem doesn't appear. For testing purposes, I've created a similar setup on http://newmoon.wz.cz/test/page.php . example.com uses cookie-based sessions (and there's nothing I can do about that), so without cookies, process.asp won't execute. How do I force IE to save those cookies? Results of sniffing the HTTP traffic: on GET /someform.asp response, there's a valid per-session Set-Cookie header (e.g. Set-Cookie: ASPKSJIUIUGF=JKHJUHVGFYTTYFY), but on POST /process.asp request, there is no Cookie header at all. Edit3: some AJAX+serverside scripting is apparently capable to sidestep the problem, but that looks very much like a bug, plus it opens a whole new set of security holes. I don't want my applications to use a combination of bug+security hole just because it's easy. Edit: the P3P policy was the root cause, full explanation below.

    Read the article

  • Website image caching with Apache

    - by Piskvor
    How can I get static content on Apache to be {cached by browser} and not {checked for freshness {with every request}}? I'm working on a website hosted on Apache webserver. Recently, I was testing something with headers (Content-Type for different types of content) and saw a lot of conditional requests for images. Example: 200 /index.php?page=1234&action=list 304 /favicon.ico 304 /img/logo.png 304 /img/arrow.png (etc.) Although the image files are static content and are cached by the browser, every time an user opens a page that links to them, they are conditionally requested, to which they send "304 Not Modified". That's good (less data transferred), but it means 20+ more requests with every page load (longer page load due to all those round-trips, even with Keep-Alive and pipelining enabled). How do I tell the browser to keep the existing file and not check for newer version? EDIT: the mod_expires method works, even with the favicon.

    Read the article

1