Show all folders, empty Trash?

[Guest theeldergeek]

Is their a way I can empty users /.Trash folders via WGM or ARD, or see these folders in the users space on my xserve? Much like Windows can see hidden files/folders in Explorer, is their a Mac alternative?

 

My aim is to try and be able to empty users /.Trash folders for them, as I am getting a HUGE amount of data hogging space on my server which is being held in users /.Trash folders.

 

Users will be 'educated' that these folders will be emptied periodically, so they should not store files or folders they wish to retain in there (yes, I have known users who used the Windows Recycle Bin for storing files!) but I need an easy way to access the folders so I can simply delete whatever is in there.

 

Possible?

[HodgeHi]

i Think the trash folder/file is hidden. You may just need to make it visible to delete the .trash folder. There is a command for terminal that can do this for you. Or you can get an application that does the same thing. I've never done this on the Server before though.

 

Once example:

 

Apple - Downloads - UNIX & Open Source - Change Finder

 

You could then crete a script that deleted the users' .Trash file from each of their Home dirs. You could probably do this bit with out the first bit though

Edited April 21, 2010 by HodgeHi

[Arthur]

Server Cleanup 3 is what you need. Try it on a test user first though.

[Guest theeldergeek]

i Think the trash folder/file is hidden. You may just need to make it visible to delete the .trash folder. There is a command for terminal that can do this for you. Or you can get an application that does the same thing. I've never done this on the Server before though.

 

Once example:

 

Apple - Downloads - UNIX & Open Source - Change Finder

 

I found that with that little util, once you had run it, there was no hope of deleting it as it kept telling me there was a file in use. I downloaded it to a "Downloads" folder, and ran it from there. When I went to move it somewhere else as I decided I'd keep it at that stage, I couldn't. When I went to delete it, I couldn't. Then it corrupted in some way and wouldn't run at all... I had to log in as a local admin user, delete the program, then log back in as me. I've decided not to keep it.

[Guest theeldergeek]

Server Cleanup 3 is what you need. Try it on a test user first though.

 

Looks perfect for the job, shame I only have live data to play with, I daren't give it go!

[HodgeHi]

Where in the Users home dirs is the trash found?

 

If they are at the root of the users' home dirs then perhaps something like

 

rm /UserHomeShare/*/.Trash

 

The * is used to replace the user name. It should traverse each account listed in the homeshare and then delete the .trash file in each user home dir.

 

Make a back up first though.

 

You could maybe test the process with a separate share with a copy of home dirs in side.

[AntonioRocco]

Hi

 

Just to add to Mark's excellent suggestion. Probably the most dangerous command to use is the "rm" command. In my view it's best to add some options as there are no undos once the command is run and there have been many who've ran the command and ended up removing more than they bargained for!

 

sudo rm -R -v -i /pathtowherever

 

Would provide feedback as well as slightly safeguarding what you're about to do. The -R option in rm attempts to remove the file hierarchy rooted in the directory path. The -v option means verbose - visual feedback basically and the -i option prompts for confirmation. User either responds with y or n (yes/no). If there are hundreds and hundreds of files I would not use the -i option.

 

To permanently remove files rooted in a Users Trash the command would be:

 

sudo rm -R -v -i /Users/username/.Trash/*

 

With ARD you would remove "sudo" and run the command as root.

 

You could approach this another way? With WorkGroup Manager you can use the Mobility Preferences to "cache' the User's profile on the local drive when first logging in. User works as normal and on successful logout and sync everything would be deleted from the local drive. You use WGM to define what is synced on logout. In your case (if I've understood you correctly) define Desktop and Documents and nothing else. Whatever is in the trash will be gone.

 

Hope this helps?

 

Antonio Rocco (ACSA)

Edited May 23, 2010 by AntonioRocco

[Guest theeldergeek]

You could approach this another way? With WorkGroup Manager you can use the Mobility Preferences to "cache' the User's profile on the local drive when first logging in. User works as normal and on successful logout and sync everything would be deleted from the local drive. You use WGM to define what is synced on logout. In your case (if I've understood you correctly) define Desktop and Documents and nothing else. Whatever is in the trash will be gone.

 

Antonio Rocco (ACSA)

 

Me being me, I prefer this option. As you know, I'm not very good with 'command line' operation, so I'm very cautious of going down this route. I will obviously need to empty the trash folders already on the server, but if I can achieve what you suggest, then trash wouldn't be an issue moving forward. I'll look into this, thanks.

[RingOfFlame]

Maybe about time to learn the command line then?

[Guest theeldergeek]

Maybe about time to learn the command line then?

 

I'll pick it up as I go along. This time 18 months ago, I wouldn't have even attempted half of what I now do on a daily basis with my Mac network, so whilst progression on the Mac side of things is not as fast as it might be, it gets me by and I have come a long way with my learning, much thanks to this particular forum for that.

[HodgeHi]

I'll pick it up as I go along. This time 18 months ago, I wouldn't have even attempted half of what I now do on a daily basis with my Mac network, so whilst progression on the Mac side of things is not as fast as it might be, it gets me by and I have come a long way with my learning, much thanks to this particular forum for that.

 

I am exactly the same.

[RingOfFlame]

I'll pick it up as I go along. This time 18 months ago, I wouldn't have even attempted half of what I now do on a daily basis with my Mac network, so whilst progression on the Mac side of things is not as fast as it might be, it gets me by and I have come a long way with my learning, much thanks to this particular forum for that.

 

Are your employers aware you are not up to speed with the infrastructure you support?

[Dos_Box]

Are your employers aware you are not up to speed with the infrastructure you support?

 

The amazing thing about IT is the sheer scale of it. Most people have a 'starting point'. This will be the point at which they enter the IT profession. From here they will have to learn not only current systems, but those in the past and 'sideways' onto other platforms too. Your comment is both naive and ill thought out. I know of no one working in IT who knows everything, and everyone starts somewhere.

[Guest theeldergeek]

Are your employers aware you are not up to speed with the infrastructure you support?

 

No, I don't know everything there is to know about the infrastructure I support, and yes, my employer is fully aware of this.

 

Part of my job is to find out solutions to problems that occur, and in the main, I do find solutions. I've been working in IT since the mid 90's, and there isn't a day gone by where I've had the answer to every single issue I've come across.

 

I do my current job better than the ability which is expected of me AFAIC, which I would suggest is the same for the majority of technicians.

 

As you have of course read the thread in it's entirety, you acknowledge that the issue being discussed isn't one of supporting the infrastructure, it is one of improving it, to make my job (and those of my colleagues) easier. As things stand, I can actually support the current infrastructure perfectly adequately.

 

I don't have a problem with admitting IT is a constant learning curve. The day it becomes less than that, is the day I resign and go do something else.

Edited May 24, 2010 by theeldergeek

[RingOfFlame]

The amazing thing about IT is the sheer scale of it. Most people have a 'starting point'. This will be the point at which they enter the IT profession. From here they will have to learn not only current systems, but those in the past and 'sideways' onto other platforms too. Your comment is both naive and ill thought out. I know of no one working in IT who knows everything, and everyone starts somewhere.

 

No my comment is valid. I am not suggesting someone needs to know everything regarding IT but If someone is taken on to do a job then they should be able to support that system from the start. As new systems are added training should take place on these new systems and then the support given will be fit for purpose.

 

There is a lot of talk on these boards regarding support frameworks, qualifications and training and how this is what is needed for schools to receive the correct service, yet your comments above advocate the learn as you go alone, know just enough style of support.

[witch]

No my comment is valid. I am not suggesting someone needs to know everything regarding IT but If someone is taken on to do a job then they should be able to support that system from the start. As new systems are added training should take place on these new systems and then the support given will be fit for purpose.

 

There is a lot of talk on these boards regarding support frameworks, qualifications and training and how this is what is needed for schools to receive the correct service, yet your comments above advocate the learn as you go alone, know just enough style of support.

 

TBF, theeldergeek has said that he CAN support the structure as it is . However, I do agree that there is an issue with training, and whilst a lot of us are happy to learn as we go, many would benefit from much more training. We do seem, in the main, to be left to struggle through, which can be an issue for some (like me) who have little time to play or experiment with the systems and who work alone and therefore have no chance to learn from someone more experienced.

[powdarrmonkey]

No my comment is valid. I am not suggesting someone needs to know everything regarding IT but If someone is taken on to do a job then they should be able to support that system from the start. As new systems are added training should take place on these new systems and then the support given will be fit for purpose.

 

You haven't allowed for the traditional British HoD approach to new ideas:

 

1. Wowed by salespeople and/or shiny adverts and/or Apple Corporation;

2. Insist on kitting out a suite of said technology, ignoring all advice to the contrary or protests that nobody has the skills to support it;

3. Find there isn't enough money left in any budget to pay for it, let alone training on it (if there is some money, refuse to spend it anyway);

4. When technical staff still aren't able to support it, whinge that IT are useless and/or say "how hard can it be, you're good at this stuff".

[dayzd]

You haven't allowed for the traditional British HoD approach to new ideas:

 

1. Wowed by salespeople and/or shiny adverts and/or Apple Corporation;

2. Insist on kitting out a suite of said technology, ignoring all advice to the contrary or protests that nobody has the skills to support it;

3. Find there isn't enough money left in any budget to pay for it, let alone training on it (if there is some money, refuse to spend it anyway);

4. When technical staff still aren't able to support it, whinge that IT are useless and/or say "how hard can it be, you're good at this stuff".

 

That is EXACTLY why we've struggled with our Macs for the last 12 months (well, except the financial part. Managment seemed happy to throw lots of money at it, there was just no time...). It seems that no-one outside my office could even contemplate the fact that the IT team had zero experience with networked Macs, and only I had domestic experience in the previous 18 months. But still every little problem was 'a technical issue' so I needed to 'get it sorted now, as it's affecting teaching and learning'.

 

Anyway, regarding the OP... That Server Cleanup utility looks useful - thanks! *downloads for use while reconfiguring a hastily set up Mac system into something more stable over the summer*

Edited May 25, 2010 by dayzd

[Guest theeldergeek]

TBF, theeldergeek has said that he CAN support the structure as it is . However, I do agree that there is an issue with training, and whilst a lot of us are happy to learn as we go, many would benefit from much more training. We do seem, in the main, to be left to struggle through, which can be an issue for some (like me) who have little time to play or experiment with the systems and who work alone and therefore have no chance to learn from someone more experienced.

 

I'd probably benefit from training to improve on what I could do within my job role, as I fall into the "learn as we go" (LAWG), which in some respects frustrates the heck out of me, but in others is an aspect I enjoy. I'd like to learn new skills or have some formal recognition of skills I already possess.

 

That said, I don't think an employer should shirk the responsibility of training staff when new technologies come on board, but regretfully, my employer will not pay out for even the most basic of training. Aside from some rather questionable Apple training, the best I have ever been offered, was an NVQ at a level I would expect a 10 year old to know!

 

I have had one almighty struggle with learning how to run and administer a Mac network as it was totally alien to me when it all started. I did do some training with Apple when it all first started, but the training was so badly delivered that not one person in a class of about 10 passed the end of training exam. Thereafter, instead of re-training us, a deal was struck whereby our local Apple dealer would give us 'x' amount of support on site. This didn't really help me learn or understand what I was faced with, and so it was really down to the "LAWG" method, and that's what has got me where I am today, minus a few weeks off sick with anxiety!

 

Given the scope of my role, there is no way I can (or ever could) know everything, but what I can do (and do do), is support the infrastructure to the standard required. After that, most of what I do is looking to improve what we have, which is generally where the "how do I" element comes in.

 

I think (hope) that what RofF was asking, was whether or not my employer was aware of the shortcomings of my position because I was having to resort to forums to seek advice as opposed to receiving adequate, quality training. I don't think it was intended as a criticism of me, per se, more of the position I (and many others like me) find ourselves in.

 

Maybe the attitude to training staff is different in the USA?

Edited May 25, 2010 by theeldergeek

[Guest theeldergeek]

... but If someone is taken on to do a job then they should be able to support that system from the start. As new systems are added training should take place on these new systems and then the support given will be fit for purpose.

 

Can I just point out, I wasn't taken on to support the system; the 'system' as it was when I started, I could support standing on my head, hands tied behind my back, whilst whistling the Star-Spangled Banner! (or A N Other National Anthem) And then some...

 

What happened was, a new system was 'installed' in the school (namely Apple iMac's) in which I had no real part in consultation, configuring or initially, training. Thus, I agree fully with your sentiments concerning training on newly installed and/or alien systems.

 

I did get eventually get training on Apple, by Apple, but as mentioned in another reply, it was so badly delivered no-one in the class benefited from it.

 

Fortunately, we did have a 'honeymoon' period whereby we had some time to familiarise ourselves with the new system before it went live. This period gave us time to ensure adequate support was in place when we did eventually go live.

 

As time has progressed, I have 'discovered' new ways to improve on what we have, and better ways to support it.

 

Thus, I don't think it is fair for anyone to suggest anyone should know everything about IT; even if you specialise in one particular area of expertise there will always be something that throws a spanner in the works.

Edited May 25, 2010 by theeldergeek

[HodgeHi]

IMO when training is given, it is given as general information. Only when you use the products in your environment do you realise that some things just weren't covered that you did need to know about. Training cannot cover every eventuality, but is there only to provide the basic understanding of something or a process. So even after being trained on a product you may find yourself coming up short on certain things, which will usually result in searching the web for answers or asking in forums such as these.

 

Isn't this one of the reasons the Internet has become so useful, especially for IT guys?

 

If people think that by having training on a product means they know every little nook and cranny of it, then I think they too are being a little naive.

 

Sometimes you just have to figure things out for yourself (with a little help from your friends )

[Guest theeldergeek]

....a little help from your friends )

 

And I get by....