Linux CLI watch switch -e, --errexit unexpected exit with "command exit with a non-zero status, press a key to exit" - linux

Linux CLI watch command has a switch -e, --errexit
that has a description:
Freeze updates on command error, and exit after a key press.
That switch should make watch stop executing command if it returned non zero exit code.
The problem is that watch terminates if the output of command does not fit into the CLI window. The problem is present sometimes when the CLI window is full screen on Ubuntu 18.04 and always when you resize window or it is smaller than full screen.
An example of script having commands:
task.sh
#!/bin/sh
for i in $(seq 1 200)
do
printf "Task #${i}\n";
done
exit 0;
and watch command:
watch -e -n 1 ./task.sh;
watch unexpected error:
command exit with a non-zero status, press a key to exit
How to solve that problem? I can't redirect standard output to /dev/null because at least partial output of the commands that are executed with watch needs to be printed and watch should terminate if any command of the executed script returns non zero exit code so I guess I'm forced to use -e, --errexit switch.
If there is no good solution to that specific watch behavior, is there any good replacement for watch?
EDIT
It looks like watch problem is rather related to multiple commands print exceeding visible terminal output than the the total of printed string.
This example uses single printf and does not have any problem when resizing terminal screen even it prints more than the visible part of the terminal:
#!/bin/sh
output="";
for i in $(seq 1 200)
do
output="${output}$(printf "Task #${i}")\n";
done
printf "$output";
exit 0;
but this hack can work with relative small scripts, I can't imagine using watch and doing this workaround for every command inside task.sh srcipt

Another workaround :
#!/usr/bin/env bash
temp="$(mktemp /tmp/watch.XXXXXXX)"
exec 3>&1; exec > $temp
date # for demo purpose
for i in $(seq 1 200)
do
printf "Task #${i}\n";
done
exec 1>&3
cat $temp; rm $temp
So you don't need to change much the original bash script.
I cannot think of way using variable, if tmp file is really an issue, try this :
#!/usr/bin/env bash
{
date # for demo purpose
for i in $(seq 1 200)
do
printf "Task #${i}\n";
done
} | head -n $LINES

Task wrapper for watch with -e switch (exit on error).
Does not have any problem when resizing terminal window, even down to just 1 line.
Optionally may save stdout and stderr into a file.
Works as #!/bin/bash or #!/bin/sh
task-wrapper.sh
#!/bin/sh
# path to file where to put stdout and stderr on error
error_log="$1";
output="$(
# exit sub shell with non zero code on
# any line in sub shell having non zero exit code
set -e;
{
# ========== Commands Block =============
# uncomment below to simulate an error
# ls /this/is/non/existing/path;
# an example of lot of print exceeding
# count of displayed terminal lines
for i in $(seq 1 200)
do
printf "Task #${i}\n";
done
# uncomment below to simulate an error
# ls /this/is/non/existing/path;
# ========== Commands Block =============
} 2>&1;
)";
# get sub shell exit code
# print output (limit to terminal capacity)
# save error if any
# exit with error code if any
# or exit 0;
ec="$?"; if [ $ec -eq 0 ]; then
# zero exit code
# prevent echo if there are only two
# lines of terminal available because
# they may be already consumed by watch
# and its status if watch run without
# --no-title switch (default)
if [ $LINES -gt 2 ]; then
echo "$output" | tail -n "$(($LINES - 2))";
fi;
exit 0;
else
# non zero exit code
# watch on error
# consumes additional one line
# therefore don't echo if lines
# available are less than 4
if [ "$LINES" -gt 3 ]; then
echo "$output" | tail -n "$(($LINES - 3))";
fi;
# watch erases terminal
# output after press of any key
# and its teminal print has no scroll
# so save whole stdout and stderr to file
# if path to it was provided
if [ -n "$error_log" ]; then
echo "$output" > "$error_log";
fi;
# exit with sub shell exit code
exit "$ec";
fi;
Usage:
watch -e ./task-wrapper.sh
Usage with path to file created as error log
watch -e ./task-wrapper.sh ./task-error.log

Related

Bash command with pipe('|') alway return exit code of 0, even in error case [duplicate]

I want to execute a long running command in Bash, and both capture its exit status, and tee its output.
So I do this:
command | tee out.txt
ST=$?
The problem is that the variable ST captures the exit status of tee and not of command. How can I solve this?
Note that command is long running and redirecting the output to a file to view it later is not a good solution for me.
There is an internal Bash variable called $PIPESTATUS; it’s an array that holds the exit status of each command in your last foreground pipeline of commands.
<command> | tee out.txt ; test ${PIPESTATUS[0]} -eq 0
Or another alternative which also works with other shells (like zsh) would be to enable pipefail:
set -o pipefail
...
The first option does not work with zsh due to a little bit different syntax.
Dumb solution: Connecting them through a named pipe (mkfifo). Then the command can be run second.
mkfifo pipe
tee out.txt < pipe &
command > pipe
echo $?
using bash's set -o pipefail is helpful
pipefail: the return value of a pipeline is the status of
the last command to exit with a non-zero status,
or zero if no command exited with a non-zero status
There's an array that gives you the exit status of each command in a pipe.
$ cat x| sed 's///'
cat: x: No such file or directory
$ echo $?
0
$ cat x| sed 's///'
cat: x: No such file or directory
$ echo ${PIPESTATUS[*]}
1 0
$ touch x
$ cat x| sed 's'
sed: 1: "s": substitute pattern can not be delimited by newline or backslash
$ echo ${PIPESTATUS[*]}
0 1
This solution works without using bash specific features or temporary files. Bonus: in the end the exit status is actually an exit status and not some string in a file.
Situation:
someprog | filter
you want the exit status from someprog and the output from filter.
Here is my solution:
((((someprog; echo $? >&3) | filter >&4) 3>&1) | (read xs; exit $xs)) 4>&1
echo $?
See my answer for the same question on unix.stackexchange.com for a detailed explanation and an alternative without subshells and some caveats.
By combining PIPESTATUS[0] and the result of executing the exit command in a subshell, you can directly access the return value of your initial command:
command | tee ; ( exit ${PIPESTATUS[0]} )
Here's an example:
# the "false" shell built-in command returns 1
false | tee ; ( exit ${PIPESTATUS[0]} )
echo "return value: $?"
will give you:
return value: 1
So I wanted to contribute an answer like lesmana's, but I think mine is perhaps a little simpler and slightly more advantageous pure-Bourne-shell solution:
# You want to pipe command1 through command2:
exec 4>&1
exitstatus=`{ { command1; printf $? 1>&3; } | command2 1>&4; } 3>&1`
# $exitstatus now has command1's exit status.
I think this is best explained from the inside out - command1 will execute and print its regular output on stdout (file descriptor 1), then once it's done, printf will execute and print icommand1's exit code on its stdout, but that stdout is redirected to file descriptor 3.
While command1 is running, its stdout is being piped to command2 (printf's output never makes it to command2 because we send it to file descriptor 3 instead of 1, which is what the pipe reads). Then we redirect command2's output to file descriptor 4, so that it also stays out of file descriptor 1 - because we want file descriptor 1 free for a little bit later, because we will bring the printf output on file descriptor 3 back down into file descriptor 1 - because that's what the command substitution (the backticks), will capture and that's what will get placed into the variable.
The final bit of magic is that first exec 4>&1 we did as a separate command - it opens file descriptor 4 as a copy of the external shell's stdout. Command substitution will capture whatever is written on standard out from the perspective of the commands inside it - but since command2's output is going to file descriptor 4 as far as the command substitution is concerned, the command substitution doesn't capture it - however once it gets "out" of the command substitution it is effectively still going to the script's overall file descriptor 1.
(The exec 4>&1 has to be a separate command because many common shells don't like it when you try to write to a file descriptor inside a command substitution, that is opened in the "external" command that is using the substitution. So this is the simplest portable way to do it.)
You can look at it in a less technical and more playful way, as if the outputs of the commands are leapfrogging each other: command1 pipes to command2, then the printf's output jumps over command 2 so that command2 doesn't catch it, and then command 2's output jumps over and out of the command substitution just as printf lands just in time to get captured by the substitution so that it ends up in the variable, and command2's output goes on its merry way being written to the standard output, just as in a normal pipe.
Also, as I understand it, $? will still contain the return code of the second command in the pipe, because variable assignments, command substitutions, and compound commands are all effectively transparent to the return code of the command inside them, so the return status of command2 should get propagated out - this, and not having to define an additional function, is why I think this might be a somewhat better solution than the one proposed by lesmana.
Per the caveats lesmana mentions, it's possible that command1 will at some point end up using file descriptors 3 or 4, so to be more robust, you would do:
exec 4>&1
exitstatus=`{ { command1 3>&-; printf $? 1>&3; } 4>&- | command2 1>&4; } 3>&1`
exec 4>&-
Note that I use compound commands in my example, but subshells (using ( ) instead of { } will also work, though may perhaps be less efficient.)
Commands inherit file descriptors from the process that launches them, so the entire second line will inherit file descriptor four, and the compound command followed by 3>&1 will inherit the file descriptor three. So the 4>&- makes sure that the inner compound command will not inherit file descriptor four, and the 3>&- will not inherit file descriptor three, so command1 gets a 'cleaner', more standard environment. You could also move the inner 4>&- next to the 3>&-, but I figure why not just limit its scope as much as possible.
I'm not sure how often things use file descriptor three and four directly - I think most of the time programs use syscalls that return not-used-at-the-moment file descriptors, but sometimes code writes to file descriptor 3 directly, I guess (I could imagine a program checking a file descriptor to see if it's open, and using it if it is, or behaving differently accordingly if it's not). So the latter is probably best to keep in mind and use for general-purpose cases.
(command | tee out.txt; exit ${PIPESTATUS[0]})
Unlike #cODAR's answer this returns the original exit code of the first command and not only 0 for success and 127 for failure. But as #Chaoran pointed out you can just call ${PIPESTATUS[0]}. It is important however that all is put into brackets.
In Ubuntu and Debian, you can apt-get install moreutils. This contains a utility called mispipe that returns the exit status of the first command in the pipe.
Outside of bash, you can do:
bash -o pipefail -c "command1 | tee output"
This is useful for example in ninja scripts where the shell is expected to be /bin/sh.
The simplest way to do this in plain bash is to use process substitution instead of a pipeline. There are several differences, but they probably don't matter very much for your use case:
When running a pipeline, bash waits until all processes complete.
Sending Ctrl-C to bash makes it kill all the processes of a pipeline, not just the main one.
The pipefail option and the PIPESTATUS variable are irrelevant to process substitution.
Possibly more
With process substitution, bash just starts the process and forgets about it, it's not even visible in jobs.
Mentioned differences aside, consumer < <(producer) and producer | consumer are essentially equivalent.
If you want to flip which one is the "main" process, you just flip the commands and the direction of the substitution to producer > >(consumer). In your case:
command > >(tee out.txt)
Example:
$ { echo "hello world"; false; } > >(tee out.txt)
hello world
$ echo $?
1
$ cat out.txt
hello world
$ echo "hello world" > >(tee out.txt)
hello world
$ echo $?
0
$ cat out.txt
hello world
As I said, there are differences from the pipe expression. The process may never stop running, unless it is sensitive to the pipe closing. In particular, it may keep writing things to your stdout, which may be confusing.
PIPESTATUS[#] must be copied to an array immediately after the pipe command returns.
Any reads of PIPESTATUS[#] will erase the contents.
Copy it to another array if you plan on checking the status of all pipe commands.
"$?" is the same value as the last element of "${PIPESTATUS[#]}",
and reading it seems to destroy "${PIPESTATUS[#]}", but I haven't absolutely verified this.
declare -a PSA
cmd1 | cmd2 | cmd3
PSA=( "${PIPESTATUS[#]}" )
This will not work if the pipe is in a sub-shell. For a solution to that problem,
see bash pipestatus in backticked command?
Base on #brian-s-wilson 's answer; this bash helper function:
pipestatus() {
local S=("${PIPESTATUS[#]}")
if test -n "$*"
then test "$*" = "${S[*]}"
else ! [[ "${S[#]}" =~ [^0\ ] ]]
fi
}
used thus:
1: get_bad_things must succeed, but it should produce no output; but we want to see output that it does produce
get_bad_things | grep '^'
pipeinfo 0 1 || return
2: all pipeline must succeed
thing | something -q | thingy
pipeinfo || return
Pure shell solution:
% rm -f error.flag; echo hello world \
| (cat || echo "First command failed: $?" >> error.flag) \
| (cat || echo "Second command failed: $?" >> error.flag) \
| (cat || echo "Third command failed: $?" >> error.flag) \
; test -s error.flag && (echo Some command failed: ; cat error.flag)
hello world
And now with the second cat replaced by false:
% rm -f error.flag; echo hello world \
| (cat || echo "First command failed: $?" >> error.flag) \
| (false || echo "Second command failed: $?" >> error.flag) \
| (cat || echo "Third command failed: $?" >> error.flag) \
; test -s error.flag && (echo Some command failed: ; cat error.flag)
Some command failed:
Second command failed: 1
First command failed: 141
Please note the first cat fails as well, because it's stdout gets closed on it. The order of the failed commands in the log is correct in this example, but don't rely on it.
This method allows for capturing stdout and stderr for the individual commands so you can then dump that as well into a log file if an error occurs, or just delete it if no error (like the output of dd).
It may sometimes be simpler and clearer to use an external command, rather than digging into the details of bash. pipeline, from the minimal process scripting language execline, exits with the return code of the second command*, just like a sh pipeline does, but unlike sh, it allows reversing the direction of the pipe, so that we can capture the return code of the producer process (the below is all on the sh command line, but with execline installed):
$ # using the full execline grammar with the execlineb parser:
$ execlineb -c 'pipeline { echo "hello world" } tee out.txt'
hello world
$ cat out.txt
hello world
$ # for these simple examples, one can forego the parser and just use "" as a separator
$ # traditional order
$ pipeline echo "hello world" "" tee out.txt
hello world
$ # "write" order (second command writes rather than reads)
$ pipeline -w tee out.txt "" echo "hello world"
hello world
$ # pipeline execs into the second command, so that's the RC we get
$ pipeline -w tee out.txt "" false; echo $?
1
$ pipeline -w tee out.txt "" true; echo $?
0
$ # output and exit status
$ pipeline -w tee out.txt "" sh -c "echo 'hello world'; exit 42"; echo "RC: $?"
hello world
RC: 42
$ cat out.txt
hello world
Using pipeline has the same differences to native bash pipelines as the bash process substitution used in answer #43972501.
* Actually pipeline doesn't exit at all unless there is an error. It executes into the second command, so it's the second command that does the returning.
Why not use stderr? Like so:
(
# Our long-running process that exits abnormally
( for i in {1..100} ; do echo ploop ; sleep 0.5 ; done ; exit 5 )
echo $? 1>&2 # We pass the exit status of our long-running process to stderr (fd 2).
) | tee ploop.out
So ploop.out receives the stdout. stderr receives the exit status of the long running process. This has the benefit of being completely POSIX-compatible.
(Well, with the exception of the range expression in the example long-running process, but that's not really relevant.)
Here's what this looks like:
...
ploop
ploop
ploop
ploop
ploop
ploop
ploop
ploop
ploop
ploop
5
Note that the return code 5 does not get output to the file ploop.out.

How to run bash script while it returns code 0?

I have bash script with many lines of code and I need run it while it returns $? == 0, but in case if it has error I need stop it and exit with code 1?
The question is how to do it?
I tried to use set -e command, but Jenkins does not marks build as failed, for him it looks like Success
I also need to get the Error message to show it in my Jenkins log
I managed to get error code(in my case it will be 126), but how to get error message?
main file
fileWithError.sh
rc=$?; if [[ $rc != 0 ]]; then
echo "exit {$rc} ";
fi
fileWithError.sh
#!/bin/sh
set -e
echo "Test"
agjfsjgfshgd
echo "Test2"
echo "Test3"
Just add the command set -e to the beginning of the file
This should look something similar to this
#!/bin/sh
set -e
#...Your code...
I think you just want:
#!/bin/sh
while fileWithError.sh; do
sleep 1;
done
echo fileWithError.sh failed!! >&2
Note that if the script is written well, then the echo is
redundant as fileWithError.sh should have written a decent
error message already. Also, the sleep may not be needed, but is useful to prevent a fast loop if the script succeeds quickly.
You can get the explicit return value, but it requires a bit of refactoring.
#!/bin/sh
true
while test $? = 0; do fileWithError.sh; done
echo fileWithError.sh failed with status $?!! >&2
since the return value of the while script will be the
return value of sleep in the first construction.
Its not quite easy to get an error code only.
How about this ...
#!/bin/bash
Msg=$(fileWithError.sh 2>&1) # redirect all error messages to stdout
if [ "$?" -ne 0 ] # Not Equal
then
echo "$Msg"
exit 1
fi
exit 0
You catch all messages created by fileWithError.sh and if the programm returned an error code then you have the error message already saved in a variable.
But this will make a disadvantage, because you will temporary store all messages created by fileWithError.sh till the error appears.
You can filter the error message with echo "$Msg" |tail -n 1, but its not 100% save.
You should also do some changes in fileWithError.sh...
Switch set -e with trap "exit 1" ERR. this will close the script on errors.
Hope this will help.

How to check if script is running or not from script itself?

Having below sample script sample.sh
#!/bin/bash
if ps aux | grep -o "sample.sh" >/dev/null
then
echo "Already script running"
exit 0
fi
echo "start script"
while true
do
echo "script running"
sleep 5
done
In above script i want to check if this script previously running or not if running then not run it again.
problem is check condition always become true (because to check the condition require to run script) and it always show me "Already script running" message.
Any idea how to solve it?
You need a proper lock. I'd do using flock like this:
exec 201> /tmp/lock.$(basename $0).file
if ! flock -n 201 ; then
echo "another instance of $0 is running";
exit 1
fi
# cmds
exec 201>&-
rm -rf /tmp/lock.$(basename $0).file
This basically creates lock for script using a temporary file. The temporary file has particular significance other than it's used to tell whether your script has acquired a lock.
When there's an instance of this program running, the next run of the same program can't run as the lock will prevent it.
For me will be safer to use a lock file , create it when process start and delete after completion.
Let the script record its own PID in a file. Before doing so, it first checks if that file currently contains an active PID, in which case it exits.
pid=$(< ${PID_FILE:?} || exit
kill -0 $PID && exit
The next exercise is to prevent race conditions when writing the file.
Try this, it gives number of sample.sh run by the user
ps -aux | awk -v app='sample.sh' '$0 ~ app { print $1 }' |grep $USERNAME|wc -l
Wtite a tmp file to the /tmp directory.
have your script check to see if the file exists, if it does then don't run.
#!/bin/sh
# our tmpfile
tmpfile="/tmp/mytmpfile"
# check to see if it exists.
# if it does then exit script
if [[ -f ${tmpfile} ]]; then
echo script already running.
exit
fi
# it doesn't exist at this point so lets make one
touch ${tmpfile}
# do whatever now.
# end of script
rm ${tmpfile}

check if file exist and wait for a sh script to run until the file is found

I'm working on a linux server which is sometimes very slow. So when i add some jobs to run for me i have to wait for a few hours just to run a simple calculation.
I was wondering if i am able to start the next analysis but let it wait until the output of the previous analysis is there. (the second analysis needs the first analysis output)
I tried to make except and other options working but still no success (found except and other options in previous question on stackoverflow):
expect {
'output/analysis_file1.txt'
}
Any ideas/hints are appreciated and will help me allot.
The only thing i want is to let the second scrip wait till the text file of the first script is given.
The 4 scripts:1.
#!/bin/bash
#$ -cwd
./script1.sh
. ./script2.sh $repla
. ./script3.sh $replac
2:
repla=''
for i in 'abcdefghijklmnopqrst'
do
repla=`echo $i | sed 's/'abc'/'xyz'/g'`
#echo $repla
done
3:
replac=''
for j in $1
do
replac=`echo $j | sed 's/'xyz'/'san'/g'`
#echo $replac
done
4:
replace=''
for h in $1
do
replace=`echo $h | sed 's/'san'/'sander'/g'`
#echo $replace
done
you can use below core with some modifications
#!/bin/bash
while [ ! -f FILE_NAME ]
do
sleep SOME_SECONDS
done
echo "file found"
You can use wait if you know the pid of the process running in background. Wait will also return the same exit code of the process it is waiting to stop.
firstProcess & # Running in background
firstPid=$!
otherProcess # Concurrent with firstProcess
wait $firstPid # Wait firstProcess finish
anotherProcess
Instead of executing multiple scripts independently you should create a master script runner like this:
#!/bin/bash
# sanity checks & parse arguments
./script1
ret=$?
# check for return value of script1 using $ret variable
./script2
ret=$?
# check for return value of script2 using $ret variable
./script3
ret=$?
# check for return value of script3 using $ret variable
...
# do cleanup and reporting

Aborting a shell script if any command returns a non-zero value

I have a Bash shell script that invokes a number of commands.
I would like to have the shell script automatically exit with a return value of 1 if any of the commands return a non-zero value.
Is this possible without explicitly checking the result of each command?
For example,
dosomething1
if [[ $? -ne 0 ]]; then
exit 1
fi
dosomething2
if [[ $? -ne 0 ]]; then
exit 1
fi
Add this to the beginning of the script:
set -e
This will cause the shell to exit immediately if a simple command exits with a nonzero exit value. A simple command is any command not part of an if, while, or until test, or part of an && or || list.
See the bash manual on the "set" internal command for more details.
It's really annoying to have a script stubbornly continue when something fails in the middle and breaks assumptions for the rest of the script. I personally start almost all portable shell scripts with set -e.
If I'm working with bash specifically, I'll start with
set -Eeuo pipefail
This covers more error handling in a similar fashion. I consider these as sane defaults for new bash programs. Refer to the bash manual for more information on what these options do.
To add to the accepted answer:
Bear in mind that set -e sometimes is not enough, specially if you have pipes.
For example, suppose you have this script
#!/bin/bash
set -e
./configure > configure.log
make
... which works as expected: an error in configure aborts the execution.
Tomorrow you make a seemingly trivial change:
#!/bin/bash
set -e
./configure | tee configure.log
make
... and now it does not work. This is explained here, and a workaround (Bash only) is provided:
#!/bin/bash
set -e
set -o pipefail
./configure | tee configure.log
make
The if statements in your example are unnecessary. Just do it like this:
dosomething1 || exit 1
If you take Ville Laurikari's advice and use set -e then for some commands you may need to use this:
dosomething || true
The || true will make the command pipeline have a true return value even if the command fails so the the -e option will not kill the script.
If you have cleanup you need to do on exit, you can also use 'trap' with the pseudo-signal ERR. This works the same way as trapping INT or any other signal; bash throws ERR if any command exits with a nonzero value:
# Create the trap with
# trap COMMAND SIGNAME [SIGNAME2 SIGNAME3...]
trap "rm -f /tmp/$MYTMPFILE; exit 1" ERR INT TERM
command1
command2
command3
# Partially turn off the trap.
trap - ERR
# Now a control-C will still cause cleanup, but
# a nonzero exit code won't:
ps aux | grep blahblahblah
Or, especially if you're using "set -e", you could trap EXIT; your trap will then be executed when the script exits for any reason, including a normal end, interrupts, an exit caused by the -e option, etc.
The $? variable is rarely needed. The pseudo-idiom command; if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then X; fi should always be written as if command; then X; fi.
The cases where $? is required is when it needs to be checked against multiple values:
command
case $? in
(0) X;;
(1) Y;;
(2) Z;;
esac
or when $? needs to be reused or otherwise manipulated:
if command; then
echo "command successful" >&2
else
ret=$?
echo "command failed with exit code $ret" >&2
exit $ret
fi
Run it with -e or set -e at the top.
Also look at set -u.
On error, the below script will print a RED error message and exit.
Put this at the top of your bash script:
# BASH error handling:
# exit on command failure
set -e
# keep track of the last executed command
trap 'LAST_COMMAND=$CURRENT_COMMAND; CURRENT_COMMAND=$BASH_COMMAND' DEBUG
# on error: print the failed command
trap 'ERROR_CODE=$?; FAILED_COMMAND=$LAST_COMMAND; tput setaf 1; echo "ERROR: command \"$FAILED_COMMAND\" failed with exit code $ERROR_CODE"; put sgr0;' ERR INT TERM
An expression like
dosomething1 && dosomething2 && dosomething3
will stop processing when one of the commands returns with a non-zero value. For example, the following command will never print "done":
cat nosuchfile && echo "done"
echo $?
1
#!/bin/bash -e
should suffice.
I am just throwing in another one for reference since there was an additional question to Mark Edgars input and here is an additional example and touches on the topic overall:
[[ `cmd` ]] && echo success_else_silence
Which is the same as cmd || exit errcode as someone showed.
For example, I want to make sure a partition is unmounted if mounted:
[[ `mount | grep /dev/sda1` ]] && umount /dev/sda1

Resources