Problems with Logkey and codes

johnhenry5151 · 11-08-2012, 07:29 PM

I'm so new to Ubuntu 12.04 I'm still in the wrapper. I'm trying to use Logkey because of a cheating wife. Just about all of the codes don't work like -s --start gives me

invalid option -- '-'
usage: sudo [-D level] -h | -K | -k | -V
usage: sudo -v [-AknS] [-D level] [-g groupname|#gid] [-p prompt] [-u user name|#uid]
usage: sudo -l[l] [-AknS] [-D level] [-g groupname|#gid] [-p prompt] [-U user name] [-u user name|#uid] [-g groupname|#gid] [command]
usage: sudo [-AbEHknPS] [-C fd] [-D level] [-g groupname|#gid] [-p prompt] [-u user name|#uid] [-g groupname|#gid] [VAR=value]
[-i|-s] [<command>]

The rest of the codes says not command not found.

Please help and thank for letting me in your forum.
David

towheedm · 11-08-2012, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnhenry5151

I'm trying to use Logkey because of a cheating wife.

Logkey will not help with that. Return the favour.

johnhenry5151 · 11-08-2012, 10:08 PM

I appreciate the advice but I just want to know. Can you help me the logkey? It is frustrating that these codes don't work. Do you think it is Ubuntu or is it a bad program?

colucix · 11-09-2012, 04:03 AM

The problem is not with logkeys, but with sudo. Look at the error messages:

Code:

invalid option -- '-'
usage: sudo [-D level] -h | -K | -k | -V

maybe it is due to a malformed command line.

An aside note: sorry for this, but you should definitively talk to your wife instead of spying her. Here the problem is that - given your purpose - your question is fairly on the edge of the hacking/cracking rule and your thread should be removed. Is there any reason for preventing me from doing that?

johnhenry5151 · 11-09-2012, 02:42 PM

Thanks...How can I fix a malformed command line?

colucix · 11-14-2012, 02:27 PM

Moderator note: since it's still not clear if solution to this topic can damage someone else's activity or someone else's computer, I close it for the reason explained above. Feel free to contact me if you want it to be re-opened, maybe arguing some valid reasons to demonstrate it doesn't violate the aforementioned LQ rule.