Re: To 'f' or not to 'f'

Run the command manually and see what the output is!

On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 4:27 PM AnrDaemon <[email protected]> wrote:

> Try
>
> cd /that/path && php -f ./somescript.php
>
> Linux is picky about file paths.
>
> Sorry for top-posting, android mail is like that.
>
> On Oct 11, 2024, 22:49, at 22:49, Steve Matzura <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >On 10/11/2024 11:43 AM, John Iliffe wrote:
> >> On Fri, 2024-10-11 at 08:56 -0400, Steve Matzura wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Under some now ancient version of PHP--probably 6, I had a cron job
> >that read:
> >>>
> >>>   php -f {my-php-script}
> >>>
> >>>   and it ran every day like it was supposed to. Now, under 8.3, the
> >job did not execute any more. I
> >>> removed the '-f' from the line in cron, and the job runs. What is
> >the difference between with and
> >>> without 'f' if '-f' is supposed to be superfluous?
> >>>
> >> The php man page says:
> >> -------
> >> --file file
> >>         -f file        Parse and execute file
> >> -------
> >> so it looks like it should work but why the { } block?  That may be
> >confusing cron.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >the {my-php-script} was just supposed to be a placeholder for the
> >email.
> >The actuaql cron command is:
> >
> >
> >cd /home/tgvpadmin/domains/theglobalvoice.info/public_html && php -f
> >mail_gallery_updates.php
> >
> >
> >With "-f" in the command, it runs, a mail message is created and sent
> >out by Postfix--I can see it in the mail log, but the message never
> >gets
> >to the intended recipients. I removed the "-f", and it works.
> >Coincidence? I don't think so. Since it doesn't generate any log, which
> >
> >I would get via email, I can't imagine why it wouldn't work with the
> >"-f" in the command. It's academic at this point, as removing the "-f"
> >caused it to work, so I'm leaving it that way.
>