How on earth do I run exacutables.

For the last 3 hours I have been trying to get Wii BAckup Fusion to run on my Computer. This was made for linux and is in the form of an exacutable file.

I marked it as exacutable and it won’t bloody open. this isn’t the first time. I have been using the system 6 months now and have NEVER been able to open one.

I am swapping back to Ubuntu this weekend because the OS has caused me nothing but stress since I got it, but until then I really need this sorted.

Please How can I fix this?

edit: it has a start.sh file is that something can I run that?

On 06/26/2012 08:26 PM, Jfreed12 wrote:
>
> For the last 3 hours I have been trying to get Wii BAckup Fusion to run
> on my Computer. This was made for linux and is in the form of an
> exacutable file.
>
> I marked it as exacutable and it won’t bloody open. this isn’t the
> first time. I have been using the system 6 months now and have NEVER
> been able to open one.
>
> How can I fix this?

Show the permissions on the file.

Are you running it from a GUI or a command prompt? What command are you
using to try to run it? Post the output when you do.

…Kevin

Kevin Miller - http://www.alaska.net/~atftb
Juneau, Alaska
In a recent survey, 7 out of 10 hard drives preferred Linux
Registered Linux User No: 307357, http://linuxcounter.net

My Permissions - imgur: the simple image sharer
I am just trying to open with Dolphin.

How can I try with command?

Hi
As your user in a terminal with a copy of the downloaded tarball;


tar xjf WiiBaFu-1.1-Linux.tar.bz2
cd WiiBaFu-1.1-Linux/
chmod 755 start.sh
../start.sh


Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 11 (x86_64) Kernel 3.0.34-0.7-default
up 9:49, 3 users, load average: 0.45, 0.43, 0.39
CPU Intel i5 CPU M520@2.40GHz | Intel Arrandale GPU

http://i.imgur.com/mqvLp.png?1 I received that

On 06/27/2012 07:06 AM, Jfreed12 wrote:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/mqvLp.png?1 I received that

you must be in the directory where the tarball is, OR give the full
path to where it is…that is, and i assume you downloaded it to your
“Download” directory, first go to that directory with


cd /home/avishek/Download

and THEN follow Malcolm’s prescription

otherwise you would have to tell where the action needs to be done, by
including the full path, like:


tar xjf /home/avishek/Download/WiiBaFu-1.1-Linux.tar.bz2
cd /home/avishek/Download/WiiBaFu-1.1-Linux/
chmod 755 start.sh
../start.sh


dd

Issue still persists http://i.imgur.com/UTpXC.png?1

On 06/27/2012 10:16 AM, Jfreed12 wrote:
>
> Issue still persists http://i.imgur.com/UTpXC.png?1
>
>

no, now the issue has changed…

now it is saying it can’t find a file named “…/start.sh” and the reason
is that you have one too many dots!

dots that do NOT exist in the instructions Malcolm gave you…he said


../start.sh

with one dot…

yes, so little can must SUCH a difference!


dd

instead, try ./start.sh
and not …/start.sh

Short Explainer:

…/ means “go up one directory”.
./ means “in this, current directory”.

so, …/start.sh says: “go up one directory, and execute the file named ‘start.sh’”
and ./start.sh says: “execute a file name ‘start.sh’ which is in the directory I am currently in”

On 2012-06-27 11:06, weighty foe wrote:

> Short Explainer:
>
> ./ means “go up one directory”.
> / means “in this, current directory”.

I assume you meant:


../ means "go up one directory".
./ means "in this, current directory".

Because


/

means in the root directory.


Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)

Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2012-06-27 11:06, weighty foe wrote:
>
>> Short Explainer:
>>
>> ./ means “go up one directory”.
>> / means “in this, current directory”.
>
> I assume you meant:
>
>


>  ../ means "go up one directory".
>  ./ means "in this, current directory".
> 

Because


>  /
> 

>
> means in the root directory.

No, weighty foe wrote the same as you. Something in the way you’re
viewing it must have removed some dots that were visible to me.

On 2012-06-27 12:17, Dave Howorth wrote:

> No, weighty foe wrote the same as you. Something in the way you’re
> viewing it must have removed some dots that were visible to me.

Umpff.

Web view is correct, right. Thunderbird displays it one way, pan another. I
assume the nntp gateway did something.

Better to use codetags always.


Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)

Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2012-06-27 12:17, Dave Howorth wrote:
>
>> No, weighty foe wrote the same as you. Something in the way you’re
>> viewing it must have removed some dots that were visible to me.
>
> Umpff.
>
> Web view is correct, right. Thunderbird displays it one way, pan another. I
> assume the nntp gateway did something.

Well I use the NNTP gateway and I saw it correctly (Thunderbird). And
you say the web shows it correctly. So it appears to be a bug in your
viewer.

> Better to use codetags always.

In principle it’s best to semantically tag everything (Tim Berners-Lee
says so) but in practice it’s easy to forget and if correct viewers
display it correctly anyway …

On 2012-06-27 14:53, Dave Howorth wrote:
> Carlos E. R. wrote:

>> Web view is correct, right. Thunderbird displays it one way, pan another. I
>> assume the nntp gateway did something.
>
> Well I use the NNTP gateway and I saw it correctly (Thunderbird). And
> you say the web shows it correctly. So it appears to be a bug in your
> viewer.

I use thunderbird as well.


Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Just as a side note regarding the original topic, it’s possible that the
filesystem on which the extraction took place is has ‘noexec’ set for
its mountpoint. /home and /tmp sometimes get this set… if nothing
else works the output from mount would help verify that one way or
another.

Good luck.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=DnQ3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Seems to me there is some dot-munching going on here. Perhaps pacman has arrived?

In my post, on the web inteface, I did indeed type “…/ means go up” or “dot dot slash” How you are seeing at a single dot is beyond me.

It would also explain why everyone else in this thread is telling him to do “dot dot slash” start.sh “…/start.sh” when he really needs to do “do slash” or “./start.sh”

It’s all very confusing. I post a double-dot and you only see one. Your post has a double-dot (which I what I tried to correct), yet you are sure you only posted a single dot…

Sorry I haven’t replied in days. I got very ill and couldn’t even get out of bed.

I have pretty much recovered now.

What I really need to know is how to open exacutables. Every single one I try to open I can’t… How on earth do I do it?? I click on the in dolphin and nothing happens. Why is this? There is no way to open them…

On 2012-07-01 03:56, Jfreed12 wrote:
>
> Sorry I haven’t replied in days. I got very ill and couldn’t even get
> out of bed.
>
> I have pretty much recovered now.

Glad you are better.

> What I really need to know is how to open exacutables. Every single one
> I try to open I can’t… How on earth do I do it?? I click on the in
> dolphin and nothing happens. Why is this? There is no way to open
> them…

You have to give samples, photos, videos… we are not there, we can not
see what you do. It is easier for us if you try in terminals, because the
text can be copied here directly.

Last time you posted you were trying


~/Download/WiiBaFu> ../start.sh

and the system responded that no such file existed, which is true.
Computers are usually stubborn and reliable in what they say. If they say a
file does not exist, it is true, it does not exist - the fault was yours,
for typing two dots. Two dots means one directory up. One dot means the
current directory.

If you double click into “start.sh” you probably would not see anything,
because you have to use a terminal to see a text program run… they would
run silently, or crash silently. Nothing to see.


Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)

Yes I got that file to run, however I still wish to be able to open exacutables. I am trying to open another program, and I have it marked as exacutable, but now whenever I click on it nothing happens at all. This is with all exacutable files.

On 07/01/2012 04:46 AM, Jfreed12 wrote:
> however I still wish to be able to open exacutables.

you must be specific: that is, are you simply wanting to open the
executable and look to see what is inside? or, are you wanting to run
the application’s/program’s/script’s executable?

those are two very different things!

note: i can’t remember the last time i tried to run an executable by
finding it in a file manager (Dolphin or any other) and clicking on it!

why? because generally speaking a program installed by YaST Software
Management or zypper will be in the openSUSE menu system–so, if i
want to run the program i go to the menu…but, if i want to open and
look inside the program’s executable i use an editor, like kwrite or mc.

if you want to run an executable without using the menu, do as already
told, and type carefully


dd