I want to do OCR on some of my images, but images are not quite very impressive. So, for cleaning it I wanted to use Fred's ImageMagick Textcleaner script. Command that I gave:-
sh textcleaner.sh input_file output_file -g -e stretch -f 25 -o 20 -t 30 -u -s 1 -T -p 20
This is the arguments which Fred has given on website itself. I am also doing for same sample image. But I don't think so any of my options are working everything is by default. And I keep getting this error also
textcleaner.sh: line 177: type: textcleaner.sh: not found
usage: dirname path
usage: basename string [suffix]
basename [-a] [-s suffix] string [...]
And At last I had to keep the files in same folder where my textcleaner script is. How can I make it global and give the absolute path to it rather than putting the files wherever textcleaner is.
It's a bash script - it says so in the first line - yet you are trying to run it in sh - which is not bash. You need to make the script executable, by running
chmod +x textcleaner
then you can run it properly using:
./textcleaner ... arguments ...
That should make the error message go away. Then try showing us a sample image so we can try and see what the problem is.
In my ImageMagick scripts, the syntax is script name ...arguments... input output. So your command should be
bash textcleaner.sh -g -e stretch -f 25 -o 20 -t 30 -u -s 1 -T -p 20 input_file output_file
See my Pointers For Use (for further configuration) at my home page: http://www.fmwconcepts.com/imagemagick/index.php
Related
I am trying to fork this docker image so that if anything changes on the original it won't affect me.
I have forked the repo corresponding to that image to my own repo.
I have cloned the repo and am trying to build it:
docker build . -t davcal/gcc-cross-x86_64-elf
I am getting this error:
+ cd /usr/local/src
+ ./build-binutils.sh 2.31.1
/bin/sh: 1: ./build-binutils.sh: not found
The command '/bin/sh -c set -x && cd /usr/local/src && ./build-binutils.sh ${BINUTILS_VERSION} && ./build-gcc.sh ${GCC_VERSION}' returned a non-zero code: 127
What makes no sense to me is that if I use the original image, it builds successfully:
FROM randomdude/gcc-cross-x86_64-elf
...
Maybe Docker Hub stores a pre-built image?
How do I fix this?
Note: I am using Windows. This shouldn't make a difference since the error originates within the container.
Edit
I tried patching the Dockerfile to chmod executable permissions to the sh files in case that was causing problems on Windows. Unfortunately, the exact same error occurs.
RUN set -x \
&& chmod +x /usr/local/src/build-binutils.sh \
&& chmod +x /usr/local/src/build-gcc.sh \
&& cd /usr/local/src \
&& ./build-binutils.sh ${BINUTILS_VERSION} \
&& ./build-gcc.sh ${GCC_VERSION}
Edit 2
Following this method, I inspected the container to see if the sh files actually exist. Here is the output.
I ran docker run --rm -it c53693f11514 bash, including the hash of the intermediate container of the previous successful step of the Dockerfile.
This is the output showing that the files do exist:
root#9b8a64ac2090:/# cd usr/local/src
root#9b8a64ac2090:/usr/local/src# ls
binutils-2.31.1 build-binutils.sh build-gcc.sh gcc-8.2.0
From the described symptoms, file exists, is a shell script, and works on other machines, the "file not found" error is most likely from Winidows linefeeds being added to the file. When the Linux kernel processes a shell script, it looks at the first line, the #!/bin/sh or similar, and then finds that interpreter to run the shell script. If that interpreter isn't found, you'll get a "file not found" error.
In this case, the file it's looking for won't be /bin/sh, but instead /bin/sh\r or /bin/sh^M depending on how you want to represent the carriage return character. You can fix that for single files with a tool like dos2unix but in general, you'll want to fix git itself since there are likely other files that have had their linefeeds corrupted. For details on adjusting the behavior of git, see this post.
I'm trying to run simple script inside docker container after start. Initialy previous developer decided to use s6 inside.
#!/usr/bin/execlineb -P
foreground { sleep 2 }
nginx
When i'm trying to start i'm gettings this message
execlineb: usage: execlineb [ -p | -P | -S nmin | -s nmin ] [ -q | -w | -W ] [ -c commandline ] script args
Looks like something wrong with executing this scripts or with execline.
I'm using docker for windows under windows10, however if somebody else trying to build this container in ubuntu(or any othe linux) evething is ok.
Can anybody help with this kind of problem?
DockerImage: simple alpine
According to our research of this "HUGE" problem we found two ways to solve it. Definitely it's a problem with special symbols, like '\r'
Option 1 dostounix:
install dostounix in your container(in docker file)
RUN apk --no-cache add \
dos2unix \
run it againts your sh script.
RUN for file in {PathToYourFiles}; do \
dos2unix $file; \
chmod a+xwr $file; \
done
enjoy your scripts.
Option 2 VsCode(or any textEditor):
Change CRLF 'End Of Line Sequence' to LF
VS Code bottom panel
Line endings options
enjoy your scripts.
I'm trying to create a Docker image from a pretty large installer binary (300+ MB). I want to add the installer to the image, install it, and delete the installer. This doesn't seem to be possible:
COPY huge-installer.bin /tmp
RUN /tmp/huge-installer.bin
RUN rm /tmp/huge-installer.bin # <- has no effect on the image size
Using multiple build stages doesn't seem to solve this, since I need to run the installer in the final image. If I could execute the installer directly from a previous build stage, without copying it, that would solve my problem, but as far as I know that's not possible.
Is there any way to avoid including the full weight of the installer in the final image?
I ended up solving this by using the built-in HTTP server in Python to make the project directory available to the image over HTTP.
Inside the Dockerfile, I can run commands like this, piping scripts directly to bash using curl:
RUN curl "http://127.0.0.1:${SERVER_PORT}/installer-${INSTALLER_VERSION}.bin" | bash
Or save binaries, run them and delete them in one step:
RUN curl -O "http://127.0.0.1:${SERVER_PORT}/binary-${INSTALLER_VERSION}.bin" && \
./binary-${INSTALLER_VERSION}.bin && \
rm binary-${INSTALLER_VERSION}.bin
I use a Makefile to start the server and stop it after the build, but you can use a build script instead.
Here's a Makefile example:
SHELL := bash
IMAGE_NAME := app-test
VERSION := 1.0.0
SERVER_PORT := 8580
.ONESHELL:
.PHONY: build
build:
# Kills the HTTP server when the build is done
function cleanup {
pkill -f "python3 -m http.server.*${SERVER_PORT}"
}
trap cleanup EXIT
# Starts a HTTP server that makes the contents of the project directory
# available to the image
python3 -m http.server -b 127.0.0.1 ${SERVER_PORT} &>/dev/null &
sleep 1
EXTRA_ARGS=""
# Allows skipping the build cache by setting NO_CACHE=1
if [[ -n $$NO_CACHE ]]; then
EXTRA_ARGS="--no-cache"
fi
docker build $$EXTRA_ARGS \
--network host \
--build-arg SERVER_PORT=${SERVER_PORT} \
-t ${IMAGE_NAME}:latest \
.
docker tag ${IMAGE_NAME}:latest ${IMAGE_NAME}:${VERSION}
I think the best way is to download the bin from a website then run it:
RUN wget http://myweb/huge-installer.bin && /tmp/huge-installer.bin && rm /tmp/huge-installer.bin
in this way your image layer will not contain the binary you download
I didn't test it thoroughly, but wouldn't such an approach be viable? (Besides LinPy's answer, which is way easier if you have the possibility to just do it that way.)
Dockerfile:
FROM alpine:latest
COPY entrypoint.sh /tmp/entrypoint.sh
RUN \
echo "I am an image that can run your huge installer binary!" \
&& echo "I will only function when you give it to me as a volume mount."
ENTRYPOINT [ "/tmp/entrypoint.sh" ]
entrypoint.sh:
#!/bin/sh
/tmp/your-installer # install your stuff here
while true; do
echo "installer finished, commit me now!"
sleep 5
done
Then run:
$ docker build -t foo-1
$ docker run --rm --name foo-1 --rm -d -v $(pwd)/your-installer:/tmp/your-installer
$ docker logs -f foo-1
# once it echoes "commit me now!", run the next command
$ docker commit foo-1 foo-2
$ docker stop foo-1
Since the installer was only mounted as a volume, the image foo-2 should not contain it anymore. You could also go and build another Dockerfile based on foo-2 to change the entrypoint, for example.
Cf. docker commit
I have container which in logs sometimes write key word which is for me important, and I want to highlight this word in color in my terminal, but also important is still see all content logs in real time (--follow). I just tried command
docker logs -f my_app --tail=100 | grep --color -E '^myWord'
but not working.
So exist some way to do this ?
I use ccze. as #aimless said, grc is the great utility also. It easy to install by sudo apt install ccze for debian/ubuntu-like OS
But if you want to colorize stderr, you need to redirect stderr output to stdout. For example:
docker logs -f my-app 2>&1 | ccze -m ansi
arg -m ansi helps if you want to scroll output normally
UPD:
ccze can be very slow. If you encounter this, try running ccze with the nolookups option: ccze -o nolookups.
originally answered - https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/461390/83391
Try this.
docker logs -f my_app --tail=100 | grep --color=always -E '^myWord'
Note the "--color=always" argument.
Another option would be to use something like https://github.com/jlinoff/colorize. I wrote it to specifically address situations like this. For example it has the ability to specify different colors for each pattern (see the help for details).
Here is an example of how to use it for your case.
$ curl -L https://github.com/jlinoff/colorize/releases/download/v0.8.1/colorize-linux-amd64 --out colorize
$ chmod a+x colorize
$ ./colorize -h
$ docker logs -f my_app --tail=100 | ./colorize '^myWord'
$ # really make it standout.
$ docker logs -f my_app --tail=100 | ./colorize -c red+greenB+bold '^myWord'
try grc. Follow the instruction to install and just pipe the logs output:
docker logs -app | grc
I'm trying to do this:
run "echo -n 'foo' > bar.txt"
and the contents of bar.txt ends up being:
-n foo \n
(With \n representing an actual newline)
I use run for other commands like rm -rf and, to my knowledge, it works fine.
I just found this in man echo:
Some shells may provide a builtin echo command which is similar or identical to this utility. Most notably, the builtin echo in sh(1) does not accept the -n option. Consult the builtin(1) manual page.
My version of bash has an echo builtin but seems to be respecting the -n flag. It looks like the shell on your deployment machine doesn't, in which case using the full path to the echo binary might do what you want here:
run "/bin/echo -n 'foo' > bar.txt"
It appears as though the -n flag isn't being interpreted as a flag by the shell. If, from the command line, one executes echo -Y hi, the output will be -Y hi.