Here's the problem: I have this script foo.py, and if the user invokes it without the --bar option, I'd like to display the following error message:
Please add the --bar option to your command, like so:
python foo.py --bar
Now, the tricky part is that there are several ways the user might have invoked the command:
They may have used python foo.py like in the example
They may have used /usr/bin/foo.py
They may have a shell alias frob='python foo.py', and actually ran frob
Maybe it's even a git alias flab=!/usr/bin/foo.py, and they used git flab
In every case, I'd like the message to reflect how the user invoked the command, so that the example I'm providing would make sense.
sys.argv always contains foo.py, and /proc/$$/cmdline doesn't know about aliases. It seems to me that the only possible source for this information would be bash itself, but I don't know how to ask it.
Any ideas?
UPDATE How about if we limit possible scenarios to only those listed above?
UPDATE 2: Plenty of people wrote very good explanation about why this is not possible in the general case, so I would like to limit my question to this:
Under the following assumptions:
The script was started interactively, from bash
The script was start in one of these 3 ways:
foo <args> where foo is a symbolic link /usr/bin/foo -> foo.py
git foo where alias.foo=!/usr/bin/foo in ~/.gitconfig
git baz where alias.baz=!/usr/bin/foo in ~/.gitconfig
Is there a way to distinguish between 1 and (2,3) from within the script? Is there a way to distinguish between 2 and 3 from within the script?
I know this is a long shot, so I'm accepting Charles Duffy's answer for now.
UPDATE 3: So far, the most promising angle was suggested by Charles Duffy in the comments below. If I can get my users to have
trap 'export LAST_BASH_COMMAND=$(history 1)' DEBUG
in their .bashrc, then I can use something like this in my code:
like_so = None
cmd = os.environ['LAST_BASH_COMMAND']
if cmd is not None:
cmd = cmd[8:] # Remove the history counter
if cmd.startswith("foo "):
like_so = "foo --bar " + cmd[4:]
elif cmd.startswith(r"git foo "):
like_so = "git foo --bar " + cmd[8:]
elif cmd.startswith(r"git baz "):
like_so = "git baz --bar " + cmd[8:]
if like_so is not None:
print("Please add the --bar option to your command, like so:")
print(" " + like_so)
else:
print("Please add the --bar option to your command.")
This way, I show the general message if I don't manage to get their invocation method. Of course, if I'm going to rely on changing my users' environment I might as well ensure that the various aliases export their own environment variables that I can look at, but at least this way allows me to use the same technique for any other script I might add later.
No, there is no way to see the original text (before aliases/functions/etc).
Starting a program in UNIX is done as follows at the underlying syscall level:
int execve(const char *path, char *const argv[], char *const envp[]);
Notably, there are three arguments:
The path to the executable
An argv array (the first item of which -- argv[0] or $0 -- is passed to that executable to reflect the name under which it was started)
A list of environment variables
Nowhere in here is there a string that provides the original user-entered shell command from which the new process's invocation was requested. This is particularly true since not all programs are started from a shell at all; consider the case where your program is started from another Python script with shell=False.
It's completely conventional on UNIX to assume that your program was started through whatever name is given in argv[0]; this works for symlinks.
You can even see standard UNIX tools doing this:
$ ls '*.txt' # sample command to generate an error message; note "ls:" at the front
ls: *.txt: No such file or directory
$ (exec -a foobar ls '*.txt') # again, but tell it that its name is "foobar"
foobar: *.txt: No such file or directory
$ alias somesuch=ls # this **doesn't** happen with an alias
$ somesuch '*.txt' # ...the program still sees its real name, not the alias!
ls: *.txt: No such file
If you do want to generate a UNIX command line, use pipes.quote() (Python 2) or shlex.quote() (Python 3) to do it safely.
try:
from pipes import quote # Python 2
except ImportError:
from shlex import quote # Python 3
cmd = ' '.join(quote(s) for s in open('/proc/self/cmdline', 'r').read().split('\0')[:-1])
print("We were called as: {}".format(cmd))
Again, this won't "un-expand" aliases, revert to the code that was invoked to call a function that invoked your command, etc; there is no un-ringing that bell.
That can be used to look for a git instance in your parent process tree, and discover its argument list:
def find_cmdline(pid):
return open('/proc/%d/cmdline' % (pid,), 'r').read().split('\0')[:-1]
def find_ppid(pid):
stat_data = open('/proc/%d/stat' % (pid,), 'r').read()
stat_data_sanitized = re.sub('[(]([^)]+)[)]', '_', stat_data)
return int(stat_data_sanitized.split(' ')[3])
def all_parent_cmdlines(pid):
while pid > 0:
yield find_cmdline(pid)
pid = find_ppid(pid)
def find_git_parent(pid):
for cmdline in all_parent_cmdlines(pid):
if cmdline[0] == 'git':
return ' '.join(quote(s) for s in cmdline)
return None
See the Note at the bottom regarding the originally proposed wrapper script.
A new more flexible approach is for the python script to provide a new command line option, permitting users to specify a custom string they would prefer to see in error messages.
For example, if a user prefers to call the python script 'myPyScript.py' via an alias, they can change the alias definition from this:
alias myAlias='myPyScript.py $#'
to this:
alias myAlias='myPyScript.py --caller=myAlias $#'
If they prefer to call the python script from a shell script, it can use the additional command line option like so:
#!/bin/bash
exec myPyScript.py "$#" --caller=${0##*/}
Other possible applications of this approach:
bash -c myPyScript.py --caller="bash -c myPyScript.py"
myPyScript.py --caller=myPyScript.py
For listing expanded command lines, here's a script 'pyTest.py', based on feedback by #CharlesDuffy, that lists cmdline for the running python script, as well as the parent process that spawned it.
If the new -caller argument is used, it will appear in the command line, although aliases will have been expanded, etc.
#!/usr/bin/env python
import os, re
with open ("/proc/self/stat", "r") as myfile:
data = [x.strip() for x in str.split(myfile.readlines()[0],' ')]
pid = data[0]
ppid = data[3]
def commandLine(pid):
with open ("/proc/"+pid+"/cmdline", "r") as myfile:
return [x.strip() for x in str.split(myfile.readlines()[0],'\x00')][0:-1]
pid_cmdline = commandLine(pid)
ppid_cmdline = commandLine(ppid)
print "%r" % pid_cmdline
print "%r" % ppid_cmdline
After saving this to a file named 'pytest.py', and then calling it from a bash script called 'pytest.sh' with various arguments, here's the output:
$ ./pytest.sh a b "c d" e
['python', './pytest.py']
['/bin/bash', './pytest.sh', 'a', 'b', 'c d', 'e']
NOTE: criticisms of the original wrapper script aliasTest.sh were valid. Although the existence of a pre-defined alias is part of the specification of the question, and may be presumed to exist in the user environment, the proposal defined the alias (creating the misleading impression that it was part of the recommendation rather than a specified part of the user's environment), and it didn't show how the wrapper would communicate with the called python script. In practice, the user would either have to source the wrapper or define the alias within the wrapper, and the python script would have to delegate the printing of error messages to multiple custom calling scripts (where the calling information resided), and clients would have to call the wrapper scripts. Solving those problems led to a simpler approach, that is expandable to any number of additional use cases.
Here's a less confusing version of the original script, for reference:
#!/bin/bash
shopt -s expand_aliases
alias myAlias='myPyScript.py'
# called like this:
set -o history
myAlias $#
_EXITCODE=$?
CALL_HISTORY=( `history` )
_CALLING_MODE=${CALL_HISTORY[1]}
case "$_EXITCODE" in
0) # no error message required
;;
1)
echo "customized error message #1 [$_CALLING_MODE]" 1>&2
;;
2)
echo "customized error message #2 [$_CALLING_MODE]" 1>&2
;;
esac
Here's the output:
$ aliasTest.sh 1 2 3
['./myPyScript.py', '1', '2', '3']
customized error message #2 [myAlias]
There is no way to distinguish between when an interpreter for a script is explicitly specified on the command line and when it is deduced by the OS from the hashbang line.
Proof:
$ cat test.sh
#!/usr/bin/env bash
ps -o command $$
$ bash ./test.sh
COMMAND
bash ./test.sh
$ ./test.sh
COMMAND
bash ./test.sh
This prevents you from detecting the difference between the first two cases in your list.
I am also confident that there is no reasonable way of identifying the other (mediated) ways of calling a command.
I can see two ways to do this:
The simplest, as suggested by 3sky, would be to parse the command line from inside the python script. argparse can be used to do so in a reliable way. This only works if you can change that script.
A more complex way, slightly more generic and involved, would be to change the python executable on your system.
Since the first option is well documented, here are a bit more details on the second one:
Regardless of the way your script is called, python is ran. The goal here is to replace the python executable with a script that checks if foo.py is among the arguments, and if it is, check if --bar is as well. If not, print the message and return.
In every other case, execute the real python executable.
Now, hopefully, running python is done trough the following shebang: #!/usr/bin/env python3, or trough python foo.py, rather than a variant of #!/usr/bin/python or /usr/bin/python foo.py. That way, you can change the $PATH variable, and prepend a directory where your false python resides.
In the other case, you can replace the /usr/bin/python executable, at the risk of not playing nice with updates.
A more complex way of doing this would probably be with namespaces and mounts, but the above is probably enough, especially if you have admin rights.
Example of what could work as a script:
#!/usr/bin/env bash
function checkbar
{
for i in "$#"
do
if [ "$i" = "--bar" ]
then
echo "Well done, you added --bar!"
return 0
fi
done
return 1
}
command=$(basename ${1:-none})
if [ $command = "foo.py" ]
then
if ! checkbar "$#"
then
echo "Please add --bar to the command line, like so:"
printf "%q " $0
printf "%q " "$#"
printf -- "--bar\n"
exit 1
fi
fi
/path/to/real/python "$#"
However, after re-reading your question, it is obvious that I misunderstood it. In my opinion, it is all right to just print either "foo.py must be called like foo.py --bar", "please add bar to your arguments" or "please try (instead of )", regardless of what the user entered:
If that's an (git) alias, this is a one time error, and the user will try their alias after creating it, so they know where to put the --bar part
with either with /usr/bin/foo.py or python foo.py:
If the user is not really command line-savvy, they can just paste the working command that is displayed, even if they don't know the difference
If they are, they should be able to understand the message without trouble, and adjust their command line.
I know it's bash task, but i think the easiest way is modify 'foo.py'. Of course it depends on level of script complicated, but maybe it will fit. Here is sample code:
#!/usr/bin/python
import sys
if len(sys.argv) > 1 and sys.argv[1] == '--bar':
print 'make magic'
else:
print 'Please add the --bar option to your command, like so:'
print ' python foo.py --bar'
In this case, it does not matter how user run this code.
$ ./a.py
Please add the --bar option to your command, like so:
python foo.py --bar
$ ./a.py -dua
Please add the --bar option to your command, like so:
python foo.py --bar
$ ./a.py --bar
make magic
$ python a.py --t
Please add the --bar option to your command, like so:
python foo.py --bar
$ /home/3sky/test/a.py
Please add the --bar option to your command, like so:
python foo.py --bar
$ alias a='python a.py'
$ a
Please add the --bar option to your command, like so:
python foo.py --bar
$ a --bar
make magic
We are looking into building a logcheck script that will tail a given log file and email when the given arguments are found. I am having trouble accurately determining if another version of this script is running with at least one of the same arguments against the same file. Script can take the following:
logcheck -i <filename(s)> <searchCriterion> <optionalEmailAddresses>
I have tried to use ps aux with a series of grep, sed, and cut, but it always ends up being more code than the script itself and seldom works very efficiently. Is there an efficient way to tell if another version of this script is running with the same filename and search criteria? A few examples of input:
EX1 .\logcheck -i file1,file2,file3 "foo string 0123" email#address.com
EX2 .\logcheck -s file1 Hello,World,Foo
EX3 .\logcheck -i file3 foo email#address1.com,email#address2.com
In this case 3 should not run because 1 is already running with parameters file3 and foo.
There are many solutions for your problem, I would recommend creating a lock file, with the following format:
arg1Ex1 PID#(Ex1)
arg2Ex1 PID#(Ex1)
arg3Ex1 PID#(Ex1)
arg4Ex1 PID#(Ex1)
arg1Ex2 PID#(Ex2)
arg2Ex2 PID#(Ex2)
arg3Ex2 PID#(Ex2)
arg4Ex2 PID#(Ex2)
when your script starts:
It will search in the file for all the arguments it has received (awk command or grep)
If one of the arguments is present in the list, fetch the process PID (awk 'print $2' for example) to check if it is still running (ps) (double check for concurrency and in case of process ended abnormally previously garbage might remain inside the file)
If the PID is still there, the script will not run
Else append the arguments to the lock file with the current process PID and run the script.
At the end, of the execution you remove the lines that contains the arguments that have been used by the script, or remove all lines with its PID.
I saw the line data=$(cat) in a bash script (just declaring an empty variable) and am mystified as to what that could possibly do.
I read the man pages, but it doesn't have an example or explanation of this. Does this capture stdin or something? Any documentation on this?
EDIT: Specifically how the heck does doing data=$(cat) allow for it to run this hook script?
#!/bin/bash
# Runs all executable pre-commit-* hooks and exits after,
# if any of them was not successful.
#
# Based on
# http://osdir.com/ml/git/2009-01/msg00308.html
data=$(cat)
exitcodes=()
hookname=`basename $0`
# Run each hook, passing through STDIN and storing the exit code.
# We don't want to bail at the first failure, as the user might
# then bypass the hooks without knowing about additional issues.
for hook in $GIT_DIR/hooks/$hookname-*; do
test -x "$hook" || continue
echo "$data" | "$hook"
exitcodes+=($?)
done
https://github.com/henrik/dotfiles/blob/master/git_template/hooks/pre-commit
cat will catenate its input to its output.
In the context of the variable capture you posted, the effect is to assign the statement's (or containing script's) standard input to the variable.
The command substitution $(command) will return the command's output; the assignment will assign the substituted string to the variable; and in the absence of a file name argument, cat will read and print standard input.
The Git hook script you found this in captures the commit data from standard input so that it can be repeatedly piped to each hook script separately. You only get one copy of standard input, so if you need it multiple times, you need to capture it somehow. (I would use a temporary file, and quote all file name variables properly; but keeping the data in a variable is certainly okay, especially if you only expect fairly small amounts of input.)
Doing:
t#t:~# temp=$(cat)
hello how
are you?
t#t:~# echo $temp
hello how are you?
(A single Controld on the line by itself following "are you?" terminates the input.)
As manual says
cat - concatenate files and print on the standard output
Also
cat Copy standard input to standard output.
here, cat will concatenate your STDIN into a single string and assign it to variable temp.
Say your bash script script.sh is:
#!/bin/bash
data=$(cat)
Then, the following commands will store the string STR in the variable data:
echo STR | bash script.sh
bash script.sh < <(echo STR)
bash script.sh <<< STR
How and who determines what executes when a Bash-like script is executed as a binary without a shebang?
I guess that running a normal script with shebang is handled with binfmt_script Linux module, which checks a shebang, parses command line and runs designated script interpreter.
But what happens when someone runs a script without a shebang? I've tested the direct execv approach and found out that there's no kernel magic in there - i.e. a file like that:
$ cat target-script
echo Hello
echo "bash: $BASH_VERSION"
echo "zsh: $ZSH_VERSION"
Running compiled C program that does just an execv call yields:
$ cat test-runner.c
void main() {
if (execv("./target-script", 0) == -1)
perror();
}
$ ./test-runner
./target-script: Exec format error
However, if I do the same thing from another shell script, it runs the target script using the same shell interpreter as the original one:
$ cat test-runner.bash
#!/bin/bash
./target-script
$ ./test-runner.bash
Hello
bash: 4.1.0(1)-release
zsh:
If I do the same trick with other shells (for example, Debian's default sh - /bin/dash), it also works:
$ cat test-runner.dash
#!/bin/dash
./target-script
$ ./test-runner.dash
Hello
bash:
zsh:
Mysteriously, it doesn't quite work as expected with zsh and doesn't follow the general scheme. Looks like zsh executed /bin/sh on such files after all:
greycat#burrow-debian ~/z/test-runner $ cat test-runner.zsh
#!/bin/zsh
echo ZSH_VERSION=$ZSH_VERSION
./target-script
greycat#burrow-debian ~/z/test-runner $ ./test-runner.zsh
ZSH_VERSION=4.3.10
Hello
bash:
zsh:
Note that ZSH_VERSION in parent script worked, while ZSH_VERSION in child didn't!
How does a shell (Bash, dash) determines what gets executed when there's no shebang? I've tried to dig up that place in Bash/dash sources, but, alas, looks like I'm kind of lost in there. Can anyone shed some light on the magic that determines whether the target file without shebang should be executed as script or as a binary in Bash/dash? Or may be there is some sort of interaction with kernel / libc and then I'd welcome explanations on how does it work in Linux and FreeBSD kernels / libcs?
Since this happens in dash and dash is simpler, I looked there first.
Seems like exec.c is the place to look, and the relevant functionis are tryexec, which is called from shellexec which is called whenever the shell things a command needs to be executed. And (a simplified version of) the tryexec function is as follows:
STATIC void
tryexec(char *cmd, char **argv, char **envp)
{
char *const path_bshell = _PATH_BSHELL;
repeat:
execve(cmd, argv, envp);
if (cmd != path_bshell && errno == ENOEXEC) {
*argv-- = cmd;
*argv = cmd = path_bshell;
goto repeat;
}
}
So, it simply always replaces the command to execute with the path to itself (_PATH_BSHELL defaults to "/bin/sh") if ENOEXEC occurs. There's really no magic here.
I find that FreeBSD exhibits identical behavior in bash and in its own sh.
The way bash handles this is similar but much more complicated. If you want to look in to it further I recommend reading bash's execute_command.c and looking specifically at execute_shell_script and then shell_execve. The comments are quite descriptive.
(Looks like Sorpigal has covered it but I've already typed this up and it may be of interest.)
According to Section 3.16 of the Unix FAQ, the shell first looks at the magic number (first two bytes of the file). Some numbers indicate a binary executable; #! indicates that the rest of the line should be interpreted as a shebang. Otherwise, the shell tries to run it as a shell script.
Additionally, it seems that csh looks at the first byte, and if it's #, it'll try to run it as a csh script.
I have a bash script that I use to move from source to bin directories from anywhere I currently am (I call this script, 'teleport'). Since it basically is just a glorified 'cd' command, I have to run it in the current shell (i.e. . ./teleport.sh ). I've set up an alias in my .bashrc file so that 'teleport' matches '. teleport.sh'.
The first time I run it, it works fine. But then, if I run it again after it has run once, it doesn't do anything. It works again if I close my terminal and then open a new one, but only the first time. My intuition is that there is something internally going on with BASH that I'm not familiar with, so I thought I would run it through the gurus here to see if I can get an answer.
The script is:
numargs=$#
function printUsage
{
echo -e "Usage: $0 [-o | -s] <PROJECT>\n"
echo -e "\tMagically teleports you into the main source directory of a project.\n"
echo -e "\t PROJECT: The current project you wish to teleport into."
echo -e "\t -o: Teleport into the objdir.\n"
echo -e "\t -s: Teleport into the source dir.\n"
}
if [ $numargs -lt 2 ]
then
printUsage
fi
function teleportToObj
{
OBJDIR=${HOME}/Source/${PROJECT}/obj
cd ${OBJDIR}
}
function teleportToSrc
{
cd ${HOME}/Source/${PROJECT}/src
}
while getopts "o:s:" opt
do
case $opt in
o)
PROJECT=$OPTARG
teleportToObj
;;
s)
PROJECT=$OPTARG
teleportToSrc
;;
esac
done
My usage of it is something like:
sjohnson#corellia:~$ cd /usr/local/src
sjohnson#corellia:/usr/local/src$ . ./teleport -s some-proj
sjohnson#corellia:~/Source/some-proj/src$ teleport -o some-proj
sjohnson#corellia:~/Source/some-proj/src$
<... START NEW TERMINAL ...>
sjohnson#corellia:~$ . ./teleport -o some-proj
sjohnson#corellia:~/Source/some-proj/obj$
The problem is that getopts necessarily keeps a little bit of state so that it can be called in a loop, and you're not clearing that state. Each time it's called, it processes one more argument, and it increments the shell's OPTIND variable so it'll know which argument to process the next time it's called. When it's done with all the arguments, it returns 1 (false) every time it's invoked, which makes the while exit.
The first time you source your script, it works as expected. The second (and third, fourth...) time, getopts does nothing but return false.
Add one line to reset the state before you start looping:
unset OPTIND # clear state so getopts will start over
while getopts "o:s:" opt
do
# ...
done
(I assume there's a typo in your transcript, since it shows you invoking the script -- not sourcing it -- on the second try, but that's not the real problem here.)
The problem is that the first time you call is you are sourcing the script (thats what ". ./teleport") does which runs the script in the current shell thus preserving the cd. The second time you call it, it isn't sourced so you create a subshell, cd to the appropriate directory, and then exit the subshell putting you right back where you called the script from!
The way to make this work is simply to make teleportToSrc and teleportToObj aliases or functions in the current shell (i.e. outside a script)