Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I wonder if possible to have ls -l colored. I'm not talking about --color, of course.
I found an useful alias for display octal permission in an ls -l command, now, it's possible to color it? In the same way, is possible when I do ls -l, display only permissions in red or something?
I don't know how to use color code, but grep has --color option
If the first line of ls -l is not important to you, you can consider using grep
ls -l | grep --color=always '[d-][r-][w-][x-][r-][w-][x-][r-][w-][x-]'
or in shorter form:
ls -l | grep --color=always '[d-]\([r-][w-][x-]\)\{3\}'
You can use several utilities to do it, like piping the output of ls (OPTIONS...) to supercat (after defiining the rules). Or to highlight (after defining the rules).
Or use awk/sed to pretty print based on regexes. E.g. with gensub in awk, you can insert ANSI color codes to the output...
The first thing that came into my mind is that you can use --color=auto for this:
ls -l --color=auto
And it can be handy to create an alias:
alias lls='ls -l --color=auto'
However I see you don't want that. For that we have to create a more complex function that use the echo -e "colours...":
print_line () {
red='\e[0;31m'
endColor='\e[0m'
first=${1%% *}
rest=${1#* }
echo -e "${red}$first${endColor} $rest"
}
lls () {
IFS=$'\n'; while read line;
do
# echo "$line"
print_line $line
done <<< "$(find $1 -maxdepth 1 -printf '%M %p\n')"
}
If you store them in ~/.bashrc and source it (. ~/.bashrc) then whenever you do lls /some/path it will execute these functions.
If you're asking if there is an option to specify custom column-specific colors in ls, I don't think so. But you can do something like.
> red() { red='\e[0;31m'; echo -ne "${red}$1 "; tput sgr0; echo "${*:2}"; }
> while read -r line; do red $line; done < <(ls -l)
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I am a new bee to bash scripting. while studying Advanced bash scripting I came across this command. I'm not understand how the command is working and what is the use of curly braces. Thanks in advance.
Your command:
ls . | xargs -i -t cp ./{} $1
could be divided into the following parts:
ls .
List the current directory (this will list all the files/directories but the hidden ones)
| xargs -i -t cp ./{} $1
Basically the xargs breaks the piped output (ls in this case) and provides each element in the list as input to the following command (cp in this case). The -t option is to show in the stderr what xargs is actually executing. The -i is used for string replacement. In this case since nothing has been provided it will substitute the {} by the input. $1 is the name of the destination where your files will be copied (I guess in this case it should be a directory for the command to make sense otherwise you will be copying all the files to the same destination).
So for example, if you have lets say a directory that has files called a, b, c. When you run this command it will perform the following:
cp ./a $1
cp ./b $1
cp ./c $1
NOTE:
The -i option is deprecated, -I (uppercase i) should be used instead
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I have this script I'm studying and I would like to know what is cat doing in this section.
if cat downloaded.txt | grep "$count" >/dev/null
then
echo "File already downloaded!"
else
echo $count >> downloaded.txt
cat $count | egrep -o "http://server.*(png|jpg|gif)" | nice -n -20 wget --no-dns-cache -4 --tries=2 --keep-session-cookies --load-cookies=cookies.txt --referer=http://server.com/wallpaper/$number -i -
rm $count
fi
Like most cats, this is a useless cat.
Instead of:
if cat downloaded.txt | grep "$count" >/dev/null
It could have been written:
if grep "$count" download.txt > /dev/null
In fact, because you've eliminated the pipe, you've eliminated issues with which exit value the if statement is dealing with.
Most Unix cats you'll see are of the useless variety. However, people like cats almost as much as they like using a grep/awk pipe, or using multiple grep or sed commands instead of combining everything into a single command.
The cat command stands for concatenate which is to allow you to concatenate files. It was created to be used with the split command which splits a file into multiple parts. This was useful if you had a really big file, but had to put it on floppy drives that couldn't hold the entire file:
split -b140K -a4 my_really_big_file.txt my_smaller_files.txt.
Now, I'll have my_smaller_files.txt.aaaa and my_smaller_files.txt.aaab and so forth. I can put them on the floppies, and then on the other computer. (Heck, I might go all high tech and use UUCP on you!).
Once I get my files on the other computer, I can do this:
cat my_smaller_files.txt.* > my_really_big_file.txt
And, that's one cat that isn't useless.
cat prints out the contents of the file with the given name (to the standard output or to wherever it's redirected). The result can be piped to some other command (in this case, (e)grep to find something in the file contents). Concretely, here it tries to download the images referenced in that file, then adds the name of the file to downloaded.txt in order to not process it again (this is what the check in if was about).
http://www.linfo.org/cat.html
"cat" is a unix command that reads the contents of one or more files sequentially and by default prints out the information the user console ("stdout" or standard output).
In this case cat is being used to read the contents of the file "downloaded.txt", the pipe "|" is redirecting/feeding its output to the grep program, which is searching for whatever is in the variable "$count" to be matched with.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
My friend just passed me this command to count the number of files in a directory:
$ ls -lt | wc -l
Can someone please help me flush out the meaning of this command? I know that ls is to list all the files. But what does -lt mean?
Also, I get a different count if I use ls | wc -l with no -lt option. Why is that the case?
You'll want to get familiar with the "man (manual) pages":
$ man ls
In this case you'll see:
-l (The lowercase letter ``ell''.) List in long format. (See below.) If
the output is to a terminal, a total sum for all the file sizes is
output on a line before the long listing.
-t Sort by time modified (most recently modified first) before sorting the
operands by lexicographical order.
Another way you can see the effect of the options is to run ls without piping to the wc command. Compare
$ ls
with
$ ls -l
and
$ ls -lt
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Im trying to learn some bash script writing and cleaning out some old CDs (remember those?)
What I have is a bunch of backup CDs with no rhyme or reason to them so I'd like to create a grep script that will search them based on keywords. (I'm currently trying to test the script first against the desktop) I know how to run grep, but its the scripting I'm having trouble with.
So here's what I have:
#!/bin/bash
#CDGrepScript
SOURCEDIR=/home/name/Desktop (I'm currently testing it with files on the desktop)
#mount /dev/cdrom
#SOURCEDIR=/dev/cdrom
echo "hello, $USER. I will search your files"
echo Begin Search...
grep -ir "taxes|personal|School" *
echo $results
echo "The search is complete. Goodbye"
exit
Now when I run this against files on the desktop. My script hangs after "Begin search" What am I doing wrong?
Thanks for the help
You might be served better by a more general tool. Like a rgrep (recursive grep) that will walk through a tree searching for a search term. An example:
# rgrep
#
# Search for text strings in a directory hierarchy
set +x
case $# in
0 | 1 )
# Not enough arguments -- give help message
echo "Usage: $0 search_text pathname..." >&2
exit 1
;;
* )
# Use the first argument as a search string
search_text=$1
shift
# Use the remaining argument(s) as path name(s)
find "$#" -type f -print |
while read pathname
do
egrep -i "$search_text" $pathname /dev/null
done
;;
esac
Put this in your path, then you just change directories to the mount point for the CD-ROM, and type
$ rgrep "taxes" .
Or whatever other search you wish to perform.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
When I use ! to execute a previous command it automatically prints the command as well. Is there a way to hide this?
Example:
This is what happens:
ralgrad:~$ echo test
test
ralgrad:~$ !!
echo test
test
This is what I would want:
ralgrad:~$ echo test
test
ralgrad:~$ !!
test
I have looked at the bash source and there is no way to disable this automatic printing of the expanded command. You would have to compile your own version of bash!
If it is particularly important to you for whatever reason, look in bashhist.c in the pre_process_line function and comment out/remove the following line:
printf (stderr, "%s\n", history_value);
You cannot do that with !!, because it repeats the last command not the last output. As far as I know, there is no single command that allows to achieve what you are asking. However, you can try a simple hack:
result=`echo test`
echo "$result"
Well, you can simulate what you want with the following batch file:
if [ -z $1 ]; then
exe=`fc -lrn | awk 'NR==2 {print;}'`
else
exe=`fc -lrn | cut -f2- | awk 'NR>=2 {print;}' | grep "^ $*" | head -n1 `
fi
eval $exe
Let h be the name of the file (or, if you want it, even !). Then you can do:
# echo Foo
Foo
# echo Bar
Bar
# h
Bar
# h echo F
Foo