I have a bash script that takes the command line flag called "--signal".
When this is specified on the command line, I want to run a line on the command prompt.
Is there a concise way of doing a brief if-statement to check? Getops adds a lot of clutter than I'm not too fond of.
if (--signal)
# Run this line
endif
Brute force but works. Replace found's value with a boolean and if that is true then spin off your process to send signal.
#!/bin/bash
found="didn't find it"
for v in "$#"
do
if [ $v == "--signal" ]
then
found="found it"
fi
done
echo $found
The question says "tcsh", but the description says "bash". And then in the comment you mention "tcsh" again. So, I assume you want it in tcsh.
If you don't worry about error checking, like throwing errors for other unsupported arguments etc, this simple if statement does what you want. i.e checks if "--signal" is passed to the script
if ("$*" =~ "*--signal*") then
# Whatever you want to do
endif
I have a test script which has a lot of commands and will generate lots of output, I use set -x or set -v and set -e, so the script would stop when error occurs. However, it's still rather difficult for me to locate which line did the execution stop in order to locate the problem.
Is there a method which can output the line number of the script before each line is executed?
Or output the line number before the command exhibition generated by set -x?
Or any method which can deal with my script line location problem would be a great help.
Thanks.
You mention that you're already using -x. The variable PS4 denotes the value is the prompt printed before the command line is echoed when the -x option is set and defaults to : followed by space.
You can change PS4 to emit the LINENO (The line number in the script or shell function currently executing).
For example, if your script reads:
$ cat script
foo=10
echo ${foo}
echo $((2 + 2))
Executing it thus would print line numbers:
$ PS4='Line ${LINENO}: ' bash -x script
Line 1: foo=10
Line 2: echo 10
10
Line 3: echo 4
4
http://wiki.bash-hackers.org/scripting/debuggingtips gives the ultimate PS4 that would output everything you will possibly need for tracing:
export PS4='+(${BASH_SOURCE}:${LINENO}): ${FUNCNAME[0]:+${FUNCNAME[0]}(): }'
In Bash, $LINENO contains the line number where the script currently executing.
If you need to know the line number where the function was called, try $BASH_LINENO. Note that this variable is an array.
For example:
#!/bin/bash
function log() {
echo "LINENO: ${LINENO}"
echo "BASH_LINENO: ${BASH_LINENO[*]}"
}
function foo() {
log "$#"
}
foo "$#"
See here for details of Bash variables.
PS4 with value $LINENO is what you need,
E.g. Following script (myScript.sh):
#!/bin/bash -xv
PS4='${LINENO}: '
echo "Hello"
echo "World"
Output would be:
./myScript.sh
+echo Hello
3 : Hello
+echo World
4 : World
Workaround for shells without LINENO
In a fairly sophisticated script I wouldn't like to see all line numbers; rather I would like to be in control of the output.
Define a function
echo_line_no () {
grep -n "$1" $0 | sed "s/echo_line_no//"
# grep the line(s) containing input $1 with line numbers
# replace the function name with nothing
} # echo_line_no
Use it with quotes like
echo_line_no "this is a simple comment with a line number"
Output is
16 "this is a simple comment with a line number"
if the number of this line in the source file is 16.
This basically answers the question How to show line number when executing bash script for users of ash or other shells without LINENO.
Anything more to add?
Sure. Why do you need this? How do you work with this? What can you do with this? Is this simple approach really sufficient or useful? Why do you want to tinker with this at all?
Want to know more? Read reflections on debugging
Simple (but powerful) solution: Place echo around the code you think that causes the problem and move the echo line by line until the messages does not appear anymore on screen - because the script has stop because of an error before.
Even more powerful solution: Install bashdb the bash debugger and debug the script line by line
If you're using $LINENO within a function, it will cache the first occurrence. Instead use ${BASH_LINENO[0]}
I've seen this line in many shell scripts but I don't understand the effect it has. Could someone explain please?
tempfile=`tempfile 2>/dev/null` || tempfile=/tmp/test$$
It creates a temporary file and puts the path to it in the $tempfile variable.
`tempfile 2>/dev/null`
runs the tempfile command (man tempfile) and discards any error messages. If it succeeds, it returns the name of the newly created temporary file. If it fails, it returns non-zero, in which case the next part of the command runs.
For a command this || that, that only runs if this fails, i.e. returns non-zero.
$$ is a variable in bash that expands to the process ID of the shell. (Compare the results of ps and echo $$.) So tempfile=/tmp/test$$ will expand to something like tempfile=/tmp/test2278.
Presumably, later in the script, something writes to $tempfile.
The shell has a separate namespace for command and variables (making it a Lisp-2, LOL) which is exploited in your script line. tempfile is a command which is run to compute the value of the tempfile variable which is unrelated to it in any way. tempfile produces a pathname suitable for use as the name of a temporary file. 2> /dev/null redirects any error message from tempfile into /dev/null (2 is the standard error file descriptor). The command1 || command2 logic means, "execute command2 if command1 fails". If we can't get a temporary name from tempfile, then we use /tmp/test$$, where $$ is a special built-in shell parameter which expands to the shell's own process ID.
tempfile creates a temporay file with a file name similar to /tmp/tmp.XXXXXX
2>/dev/null redirects the command output to the /dev/null device, which just throws it away. This redirection just ignore any errors on creating a temporary file.
|| chains two commands together. If the first fails, the second is executed. If the first succeeds nothing else happens.
$$ is the pid of the current shell, which means that if the tempfile command fails the tempfile variable will still contain a string in the form /tmp/test6052 if the process' pid is 6052.
The first part of the line, up to the ||, runs the program tempfile and captures standard output in the variable tempfile, throwing errors away. There's an exit status, too: either zero for success or non-zero for failure (either failure to execute the tempfile command or failure reported by the tempfile command when it is run).
The || means "if the LHS (left-hand side) failed then do the RHS (right-hand side)".
So, if the tempfile command had a problem, the RHS will be used, assigning a simpler temporary file name to tempfile (the variable).
Overall, it is equivalent to:
if tempfile=`tempfile 2>/dev/null`
then : OK
else tempfile=/tmp/test$$
fi
Only it is on one line, not four.
The idea is, I'm sure, to get something in $tempfile whether or not the tempfile command exists on the machine.
Did you look at man tempfile?
That line is trying to use tempfile(1) to generate a temporary filename, storing it in $tempfile. If that fails (the "||", "or" part), it falls back to an explicit filename of /tmp/test$$, where $$ is the PID of the executing script.
When I use exit command in a shell script, the script will terminate the terminal (the prompt). Is there any way to terminate a script and then staying in the terminal?
My script run.sh is expected to execute by directly being sourced, or sourced from another script.
EDIT:
To be more specific, there are two scripts run2.sh as
...
. run.sh
echo "place A"
...
and run.sh as
...
exit
...
when I run it by . run2.sh, and if it hit exit codeline in run.sh, I want it to stop to the terminal and stay there. But using exit, the whole terminal gets closed.
PS: I have tried to use return, but echo codeline will still gets executed....
The "problem" really is that you're sourcing and not executing the script. When you source a file, its contents will be executed in the current shell, instead of spawning a subshell. So everything, including exit, will affect the current shell.
Instead of using exit, you will want to use return.
Yes; you can use return instead of exit. Its main purpose is to return from a shell function, but if you use it within a source-d script, it returns from that script.
As §4.1 "Bourne Shell Builtins" of the Bash Reference Manual puts it:
return [n]
Cause a shell function to exit with the return value n.
If n is not supplied, the return value is the exit status of the
last command executed in the function.
This may also be used to terminate execution of a script being executed
with the . (or source) builtin, returning either n or
the exit status of the last command executed within the script as the exit
status of the script.
Any command associated with the RETURN trap is executed
before execution resumes after the function or script.
The return status is non-zero if return is used outside a function
and not during the execution of a script by . or source.
You can add an extra exit command after the return statement/command so that it works for both, executing the script from the command line and sourcing from the terminal.
Example exit code in the script:
if [ $# -lt 2 ]; then
echo "Needs at least two arguments"
return 1 2>/dev/null
exit 1
fi
The line with the exit command will not be called when you source the script after the return command.
When you execute the script, return command gives an error. So, we suppress the error message by forwarding it to /dev/null.
Instead of running the script using . run2.sh, you can run it using sh run2.sh or bash run2.sh
A new sub-shell will be started, to run the script then, it will be closed at the end of the script leaving the other shell opened.
Actually, I think you might be confused by how you should run a script.
If you use sh to run a script, say, sh ./run2.sh, even if the embedded script ends with exit, your terminal window will still remain.
However if you use . or source, your terminal window will exit/close as well when subscript ends.
for more detail, please refer to What is the difference between using sh and source?
This is just like you put a run function inside your script run2.sh.
You use exit code inside run while source your run2.sh file in the bash tty.
If the give the run function its power to exit your script and give the run2.sh
its power to exit the terminator.
Then of cuz the run function has power to exit your teminator.
#! /bin/sh
# use . run2.sh
run()
{
echo "this is run"
#return 0
exit 0
}
echo "this is begin"
run
echo "this is end"
Anyway, I approve with Kaz it's a design problem.
I had the same problem and from the answers above and from what I understood what worked for me ultimately was:
Have a shebang line that invokes the intended script, for example,
#!/bin/bash uses bash to execute the script
I have scripts with both kinds of shebang's. Because of this, using sh or . was not reliable, as it lead to a mis-execution (like when the script bails out having run incompletely)
The answer therefore, was
Make sure the script has a shebang, so that there is no doubt about its intended handler.
chmod the .sh file so that it can be executed. (chmod +x file.sh)
Invoke it directly without any sh or .
(./myscript.sh)
Hope this helps someone with similar question or problem.
To write a script that is secure to be run as either a shell script or sourced as an rc file, the script can check and compare $0 and $BASH_SOURCE and determine if exit can be safely used.
Here is a short code snippet for that
[ "X$(basename $0)" = "X$(basename $BASH_SOURCE)" ] && \
echo "***** executing $name_src as a shell script *****" || \
echo "..... sourcing $name_src ....."
I think that this happens because you are running it on source mode
with the dot
. myscript.sh
You should run that in a subshell:
/full/path/to/script/myscript.sh
'source' http://ss64.com/bash/source.html
It's correct that sourced vs. executed scripts use return vs. exit to keep the same session open, as others have noted.
Here's a related tip, if you ever want a script that should keep the session open, regardless of whether or not it's sourced.
The following example can be run directly like foo.sh or sourced like . foo.sh/source foo.sh. Either way it will keep the session open after "exiting". The $# string is passed so that the function has access to the outer script's arguments.
#!/bin/sh
foo(){
read -p "Would you like to XYZ? (Y/N): " response;
[ $response != 'y' ] && return 1;
echo "XYZ complete (args $#).";
return 0;
echo "This line will never execute.";
}
foo "$#";
Terminal result:
$ foo.sh
$ Would you like to XYZ? (Y/N): n
$ . foo.sh
$ Would you like to XYZ? (Y/N): n
$ |
(terminal window stays open and accepts additional input)
This can be useful for quickly testing script changes in a single terminal while keeping a bunch of scrap code underneath the main exit/return while you work. It could also make code more portable in a sense (if you have tons of scripts that may or may not be called in different ways), though it's much less clunky to just use return and exit where appropriate.
Also make sure to return with expected return value. Else if you use exit when you will encounter an exit it will exit from your base shell since source does not create another process (instance).
Improved the answer of Tzunghsing, with more clear results and error re-direction, for silent usage:
#!/usr/bin/env bash
echo -e "Testing..."
if [ "X$(basename $0 2>/dev/null)" = "X$(basename $BASH_SOURCE)" ]; then
echo "***** You are Executing $0 in a sub-shell."
exit 0
else
echo "..... You are Sourcing $BASH_SOURCE in this terminal shell."
return 0
fi
echo "This should never be seen!"
Or if you want to put this into a silent function:
function sExit() {
# Safe Exit from script, not closing shell.
[ "X$(basename $0 2>/dev/null)" = "X$(basename $BASH_SOURCE)" ] && exit 0 || return 0
}
...
# ..it have to be called with an error check, like this:
sExit && return 0
echo "This should never be seen!"
Please note that:
if you have enabled errexit in your script (set -e) and you return N with N != 0, your entire script will exit instantly. To see all your shell settings, use, set -o.
when used in a function, the 1st return 0 is exiting the function, and the 2nd return 0 is exiting the script.
if your terminal emulator doesn't have -hold you can sanitize a sourced script and hold the terminal with:
#!/bin/sh
sed "s/exit/return/g" script >/tmp/script
. /tmp/script
read
otherwise you can use $TERM -hold -e script
If a command succeeded successfully, the return value will be 0. We can check its return value afterwards.
Is there a “goto” statement in bash?
Here is some dirty workaround using trap which jumps only backwards.
#!/bin/bash
set -eu
trap 'echo "E: failed with exitcode $?" 1>&2' ERR
my_function () {
if git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree > /dev/null 2>&1; then
echo "this is run"
return 0
else
echo "fatal: not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git"
goto trap 2> /dev/null
fi
}
my_function
echo "Command succeeded" # If my_function failed this line is not printed
Related:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/19091823/2402577
How to use $? and test to check function?
I couldn't find solution so for those who want to leave the nested script without leaving terminal window:
# this is just script which goes to directory if path satisfies regex
wpr(){
leave=false
pwd=$(pwd)
if [[ "$pwd" =~ ddev.*web ]]; then
# echo "your in wordpress instalation"
wpDir=$(echo "$pwd" | grep -o '.*\/web')
cd $wpDir
return
fi
echo 'please be in wordpress directory'
# to leave from outside the scope
leave=true
return
}
wpt(){
# nested function which returns $leave variable
wpr
# interupts the script if $leave is true
if $leave; then
return;
fi
echo 'here is the rest of the script, executes if leave is not defined'
}
I have no idea whether this is useful for you or not, but in zsh, you can exit a script, but only to the prompt if there is one, by using parameter expansion on a variable that does not exist, as follows.
${missing_variable_ejector:?}
Though this does create an error message in your script, you can prevent it with something like the following.
{ ${missing_variable_ejector:?} } 2>/dev/null
1) exit 0 will come out of the script if it is successful.
2) exit 1 will come out of the script if it is a failure.
You can try these above two based on ur req.
The colon command is a null command.
The : construct is also useful in the conditional setting of variables. For example,
: ${var:=value}
Without the :, the shell would try to evaluate $var as a command. <=???
I don't quite understand the last sentence in above statement. Can anyone give me some details?
Thank you
Try
var=badcommand
$var
you will get
bash: badcommand: command not found
Try
var=
${var:=badcommand}
and you will get the same.
The shell (e.g. bash) always tries to run the first word on each command line as a command, even after doing variable expansion.
The only exception to this is
var=value
which the shell treats specially.
The trick in the example you provide is that ${var:=value} works anywhere on a command line, e.g.
# set newvar to somevalue if it isn't already set
echo ${newvar:=somevalue}
# show that newvar has been set by the above command
echo $newvar
But we don't really even want to echo the value, so we want something better than
echo ${newvar:=somevalue}.
The : command lets us do the assignment without any other action.
I suppose what the man page writers meant was
: ${var:=value}
Can be used as a short cut instead of say
if [ -z "$var" ]; then
var=value
fi
${var} on its own executes the command stored in $var. Adding substitution parameters does not change this, so you use : to neutralize this.
Try this:
$ help :
:: :
Null command.
No effect; the command does nothing.
Exit Status:
Always succeeds.