-=> ROY J. TELLASON wrote to WAYNE CHIRNSIDE <=-
 
 WC> I am aware but having tried > and failing what's to lose by trying?

 RJT> Nothing,  just thought I'd toss that out.

 WC> It creates the file but nothing there.

 RJT> ...And > didn't?

 WC> Created a file and added but a single bit for each entry, no text.

 RJT> Hm.  What is it that you're trying to snag output from?  It may be that
 RJT> it doesn't output to stdout,  but instead goes a little more directly,
 RJT> like writing to video ram or somesuch.  A number of years back that was
 RJT> "the way things were done" in _way_ too many programs, 
and I hated it
 RJT> for portability.

A "scan" command I found in one of Basic Linux's  directories.
What I did was telnet to outgoing.verizon.net (what everyone else
calls SMTP) and got the address in nnnn.nnnn.nnnn.nnnn numerical
format than scan'ed that DNS which caused Linux to output to screen
every single supported port as well as identifying what it did
all the way from 255 down to 0./ I'd wanted to save that list.

 RJT> You could try a pipe:  |

 WC> Dang, you know I've seen enough Linux syntax to have thought of
 WC> that but didn't, redirect and pipe it into the file that's the
 WC> ticket!. Untried but intuition tells me this is correct.

 RJT> As long as the program uses stdin and stdout,  yeah.

I've got other problems just now and it'll be days before this
kludged computer is up to snuff. Well at least I'm in the Pentium now.

 WC> MC can be a hinderence in the long run IMHO keeping you from
 WC> learning far more powerful tools.

 RJT> Not necessarily.  One of the things that I did after installing was to
 RJT> use mc's F3 (view) function to look at all sorts of stuff.  Just went
 RJT> all *over* the HD,
 RJT>  looking at stuff.  This goes for executables,  too.  On some of them
 RJT> (usually the larger ones) you'll see "ELF" near the
beginning and a
 RJT> bunch of garbage -- those are compiled binaries.  Then there are
 RJT> scripts,  all over the place.  I was perusing a couple of them last
 RJT> night and actually sorta understood what was going on in most of it.

 Yeah it's cool for looking around but I'm still sold on doing it
 the other way when I get up to speed.

 WC> I really hope I saved that script to disk and will have a looksee
 WC> in the next day or so and if not resort to that rather heavy text
 WC> on the subject.

 RJT> If not,  there are plenty of scripts on your HD already to browse
 RJT> through.

 Oh I've already looked at more than a few ;-)

 WC> You know what's lacking in *nix, a few led by the hand examples
 WC> right off the bat before they get into deep waters so you get the
 WC> basic idea than run with it.

 RJT> See above.  

 Yup.

 WC> Learning scripting syntax is very high on my list of priorities.

 RJT> I have a set of files here someplace that does a pretty good job of
 RJT> describing bash scripting,  let me know if you want 'em.

If simplified yes otherwise I've already got a couple of rather
pricey and comprehensive text books on hand.

 WC> Run a shell script to search for a string even using wildcards for
 WC> a incomplete character strings than redirect and pipe that into a
 WC> file and blink you're done.

 RJT> Yep.

 WC> If you're going to work at the command line time not spent learning
 WC> this early on is soon lost many times over in unnecessary work as
 WC> time moves forward. Now I'm really new to this so bear that in mind
 WC> but that's my thinking on the matter.

 RJT> Sounds about right to me.

Man I wish Ron had stuck around at school more than 2 days a week
for three weeks before leaving... he taught at my speed
and he didn't waste time making it all seem mysterious to enlarge 
his ego.
 
--- MultiMail/PBellDOS v0.42