Hi David,

...

Cron <root at phoinix> run-parts /etc/cron.hourly

run-parts: failed to exec /etc/cron.hourly/avantfax_hourly: Exec format error run-parts: /etc/cron.hourly/avantfax_hourly exited with return code 1

The cron job is:

/etc/cron.hourly/avantfax_hourly

# runs once an hour to update the phone book 0 * * * * /srv/http/avantfax/includes/phb.php

That's a crontab(5), not something that should sit in /etc/cron.hourly to be run? $ cat >avantfax_hourly # runs once an hour to update the phone book 0 * * * * /srv/http/avantfax/includes/phb.php $ chmod +x avantfax_hourly $ run-parts $PWD run-parts: failed to exec /home/tmp/1535272096.988953819/avantfax_hourly: Exec format error run-parts: /home/tmp/1535272096.988953819/avantfax_hourly exited with return code 1 $

...

Testing manually works fine:

# ./phb.php

It's not getting that far. -- Cheers, Ralph. https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy

On 8/26/18 5:49 AM, David C. Rankin wrote:

On 08/26/2018 03:37 AM, Ralph Corderoy wrote:

...

...

...

Testing manually works fine:

# ./phb.php It's not getting that far.

I bet you would as root. The file is actually http:http owned, e.g.

-rwxr-xr-x 1 http http 988 Sep 14 2016 /srv/http/avantfax/includes/phb.php

So running as root has no problem. Running as any other user (other than http) now invokes the error that is the basis for this thread. That's why it is hard to put my finger on the cause, unless the linux-firmware update tightened security in some manner so that the cron user no longer can run as http causing the job to fail.

That's literally not how Linux permissions work. In fact, I'm not aware of any operating system on which that *is* how file permissions work. You did not get a "permission denied" error. You got a "failed to exec /etc/cron.hourly/avantfax_hourly: Exec format error". And thusly, you're completely missing Ralph's point here. The error message states "failed to exec /etc/cron.hourly/avantfax_hourly". It is saying the *file* avantfax_hourly is itself the invalid executable file. Which makes sense because "run-parts runs all the executable files named within constraints described below, found in directory directory." Why do you think run-parts "should" execute this file as a cron script? Is there some wonderful shebang in the "avantfax_hourly" file which says "execute this script as a cron executable"?

If you (as root, or http) call /srv/http/avantfax/includes/phb.php, it will silently run normally and exit with a 0 exit code. Running with any other user cause about 100 fopen (foo/bar/...) messages to scroll by and a returned exit code of 1.

That sounds like a completely different problem, since by executing the .php file you actually execute the php file, whereas by executing the crontab(5) file you get a case where programs determine on their own how to treat an executable file, in this case by failing to find a shebang line or an ELF header and complaining that it isn't a valid executable -- I will note that this actually uses execl/execve to directly execute the file, returning ENOEXEC *because it doesn't have a valid shebang* and does not use execlp/execvp which emulate shells like sh/csh/ksh/bash/zsh in attempting to fall back on executing the shell /bin/sh with the executable file as the first argument. ... In summary, if you tried to execute /etc/cron.hourly/avantfax_hourly rather than run-parts /etc/cron.hourly/avantfax_hourly, you would get the entirely different effect of it attempting to fallback on executing /bin/sh /etc/cron.hourly/avantfax_hourly, then failing with a return code of 1: /etc/cron.hourly/avantfax_hourly: line 2: 0: command not found Because the "0" in that cron invocation is not, in fact, valid as the argv0 of a shell command.

I have run this server for years and years, no problems, until today after updates. I changed nothing on the system other than 'pacman -Syu'. That what has me bewildered...

Color me equally bewildered, since the manpage of run-parts(1) emphatically declares that this shall never, ever, ever work under any conditions whatsoever. I'm assuming that you're running anacron, not run-parts. anacron will in fact run, on an hourly schedule, all executables in /etc/cron.hourly/ and will use run-parts (which is designed to "execute all executables in a directory") to, well, execute all executables in that directory. anacron, is a thing which is configured using a valid crontab(5) containing cron invocations... to run `run-parts /etc/cron.hourly/` Once again, your attempt to install crontabs as executables is the problem here. Unless you either misremembered the events of the day when you stated "I changed nothing on the system other than 'pacman -Syu'", or your -Syu updated a program that of its own volition used to execute anacron and now executes run-parts, I don't see what the issue is here. But I'm pretty sure casting the blame on CPU microcode updates is pretty darn erroneous no matter what. I think you changed something long before that, then compared the time when anacron was scheduled to begin running your invalid file, to the time you did an -Syu, and somehow decided that the two were related. They are not. If you change something, and anacron breaks, but anacron does't run until an hour later by which point you've already -Syu'ed again and updated linux-firmware, it's... understandable that the timestamps for a program designed for *delayed execution* would match up to something completely and utterly irrelevant. Mind you, this is just a guess. The only thing I know for sure is that your real problem is exactly what Ralph said it was. You're installing a crontab designed to run every hour, into a location meant to be run as an executable (by anacron which runs every hour). Please re-read the cron(8), anacron(8), and crontab(5) manpages to see where you went wrong. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User

On 8/26/18 9:48 AM, SET wrote:

Le dimanche 26 août 2018 15:11:36 CEST Eli Schwartz via arch-general a écrit :

...

some wonderful shebang

Ha ! My wonderful shebang was "#/bin/sh" instead of "#!/bin/sh".

After correcting the typo, run-parts does not complain.

Yes, that helps if the script is actually a valid script and not a crontab. :) I do wonder why run-parts uses execv instead of execvp: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/debianutils/blob/ffa3684d42b28b4d2851c011843... I would think that emulating the well-known behavior of "for actual shell scripts which do not have shebangs, try using /bin/sh if no interpreter is detected" would be a reasonable thing to do. Maybe they're trying to encourage people to use proper shebangs. This is a nice idea *in principle*, because admittedly, people should. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User

On 08/26/2018 08:11 AM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:

Why do you think run-parts "should" execute this file as a cron script? Is there some wonderful shebang in the "avantfax_hourly" file which says "execute this script as a cron executable"?

Yes, of course it does, $ head -n 2 /srv/http/avantfax/includes/phb.php #!/usr/bin/php56

Hi David,

Eli wrote:

...

Is there some wonderful shebang in the "avantfax_hourly" file which says "execute this script as a cron executable"?

Yes, of course it does,

$ head -n 2 /srv/http/avantfax/includes/phb.php

`avantfax_hourly' != `phb.php'.

At this point the issue is moot.

Only if you're not bothered about either continually misleading in asking your questions, or else not having grasped the key point you repeatedly miss. :-) -- Cheers, Ralph. https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy

On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 07:58:33 -0400, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:

...

I have run Arch on it since 2009 -- I'm familiar with what it does.

Just using a thing often used by intelligent, computer-savvy people, does not *automatically* qualify you as one of them. Just using a thing for a long time does not *automatically* qualify you as familiar with that thing.

And in this case, your aggressively prioritized attitude of learned helplessness makes me wonder whether using Arch is the best thing for you.

For reasons I don't quite understand, you seem to despise the idea of becoming more knowledgeable about how things work. I don't see how this can work out...

Eli, wouldn't it be easier for you to ignore people who are not as wise and psychologically balanced as you are? I doubt that anybody of us is able to learn from your wise comments, more likely we laugh at you, because we are psychically disturbed and dumb, so we don't know better.

On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 07:38:12 -0600, Leonid Isaev via arch-general wrote:

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 03:02:38PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

...

Eli, wouldn't it be easier for you to ignore people who are not as wise and psychologically balanced as you are? I doubt that anybody of us is able to learn from your wise comments, more likely we laugh at you, because we are psychically disturbed and dumb, so we don't know better.

Well, speak for yourself. And grow up and learn to avoid being disturbed by (deserved) critisism.

Take a look at the Archive. If Eli is mistaken, he is unable to admit that he is and even if he isn't mistaken, often half of the content of his replies contain implied self-adulation by some kind of manipulative disregard of other personalities. I'm very, very seldom disturbed by any kind of criticism, I only try to make Eli aware that several subscribers are making jokes about him, if he again makes a fool out of himself. Sure, I'm speaking for myself, this doesn't mean that I'm not aware of other subscribers' opinions. Sometimes people are writing emails off-list.

Besides, for anyone knowledgeable it would always be easier to ignore other less knowledgeable people... But you see where this would end up.

Not really and I wasn't talking about knowledge, I was talking about wisdom and psychologically balance. Consider to reread Eli's brilliant achievement of wisdom and online psychotherapy:

...

I have run Arch on it since 2009 -- I'm familiar with what it does.

Just using a thing often used by intelligent, computer-savvy people, does not *automatically* qualify you as one of them. Just using a thing for a long time does not *automatically* qualify you as familiar with that thing.

And in this case, your aggressively prioritized attitude of learned helplessness makes me wonder whether using Arch is the best thing for you.

For reasons I don't quite understand, you seem to despise the idea of becoming more knowledgeable about how things work. I don't see how this can work out...

Also consider to randomly read replies from Eli available by the Archive, maybe you'll notice something.

On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 08:59:07 -0600, Leonid Isaev via arch-general wrote:

At least Eli took time to explain what actually went wrong.

He also took the time to send a _signed_ mail off-list to me. I am afraid he's rather unwell. Calling me names :D and he's completely lost in a biased fantasy world.

Hi, I noticed that you have got a "archlinux.org" email address. I struggled with myself and then decided to send a copy of Eli's email off-list to you. I received a _signed_ message off-list from Eli. FWIW I never was banned from any community. Seemingly I'm important enough to Eli to write this off-list email. The most important sentence of his off-list email IMO is "I care more about Arch than I do about myself...". A Claim like this, in combination with fantasies about intelligence and standards is psychopathologic. Regards, Ralf Begin forwarded message: Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2018 11:19:38 -0400 From: Eli Schwartz To: Ralf Mardorf Subject: Re: [arch-general] update today causes avantfax_hourly cron: Exec format error? On 8/27/18 10:04 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

...

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 03:02:38PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

...

Eli, wouldn't it be easier for you to ignore people who are not as wise and psychologically balanced as you are? I doubt that anybody of us is able to learn from your wise comments, more likely we laugh at you, because we are psychically disturbed and dumb, so we don't know better.

I would be more than happy with a different result: having your access to our community revoked. I have no interest in you, Ralph Mardorf, ever learning anything from me. You're a legend, or should I say an infamy, on... more than one part of the internet, and merely by existing you turn our forums into a cesspit. As you have already done in other Linux communities... and been banned for.

Take a look at the Archive. If Eli is mistaken, he is unable to admit that he is

You're not nearly important enough either as an Arch user or as a human being, for me to hunt up the examples that prove you wrong. Either way, I'm not ashamed of being right more often than I'm wrong.

and even if he isn't mistaken, often half of the content of his replies contain implied self-adulation by some kind of manipulative disregard of other personalities.

I care more about Arch than I do about myself, but either way, I'm pretty sure you're confusing the idea of someone not backing down when they are in fact right, but have been Ralphed (attacked by Ralph Mardorf, it's an official thing in the communities you've crossed), for being a "manipulative personality". The truth is that I merely manipulated myself into not caring what you say.

I'm very, very seldom disturbed by any kind of criticism,

It's not a coincidence that 4chan trolls are never bothered by criticism, but rather, thrive off of conflict and the slinging of mud. They delight in twisting the facts until they can accuse their unfortunate victims of being the aggressor. As such, they, and you, derive twisted pleasure from receiving criticism.

I only try to make Eli aware that several subscribers are making jokes about him, if he again makes a fool out of himself. Sure, I'm speaking for myself, this doesn't mean that I'm not aware of other subscribers' opinions. Sometimes people are writing emails off-list.

In the extremely unlikely event that anyone whose opinions I respect have a joke to make about me, they will direct their witticisms to me in person. I do not care what you have to say about me, though, because I don't respect your opinion in any way. Your belief in what makes me "a fool" is very different from Arch Linux community standards, and the standards of most thoughtful, intelligent people, of which you are neither.

...

Besides, for anyone knowledgeable it would always be easier to ignore other less knowledgeable people... But you see where this would end up.

Not really and I wasn't talking about knowledge, I was talking about wisdom and psychologically balance.

Except, that really, really is the problem here.

Consider to reread Eli's brilliant achievement of wisdom and online psychotherapy:

[...] It's hardly brilliant, or an achievement, or even psychotherapy. I basically just said that someone who does not know how to handle the Arch Linux principles as described here: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Linux#User_centrality should consider using a Linux distribution more in line with their needs and approaches. That goes for you too, but in your case I would object that your personality is an additional disqualifier. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User

On Sat, Sep 01, 2018 at 03:31:15PM +0100, Jonathon Fernyhough wrote:

While I've had my own run-ins while getting to grips with "the Arch approach" (for want of a better phrase), I'd never resort to making personal attacks, via a mailing list or otherwise.

Taking your own advice, wouldn't it be easier for you to ignore these posts?

Or possibly even better - why don't you provide the help you think is needed, in a way which meets your expectations of how this help should be provided?

"Model good practice" instead of "do as I say, not as I do"? That way your input might be seen as a little more constructive.

All very good points. Let's think a bit more about what we post here and not let emotions run wild. If you are emotional, feel free to wait a day before sending the mail. We don't deal with issues that require immediate reactions here. However, this thread appears so have outlived its usefulness. After internal discussion I've put the list of moderation for now. Any further replies to this thread will not get through. The moderation will be removed once I feel like everyone got the message (likely a few days). Thanks for continuing to try to make this a better list! Florian