Related
This question already has answers here:
Pass commands as input to another command (su, ssh, sh, etc)
(3 answers)
Closed 6 years ago.
I'm very very new to Linux(coming from windows) and trying to write a script that i can hopefully execute over multiple systems. I tried to use Python for this but fount it hard too. Here is what i have so far:
cd /bin
bash
source compilervars.sh intel64
cd ~
exit #exit bash
file= "~/a.out"
if[! -f "$file"]
then
icc code.c
fi
#run some commands here...
The script hangs in the second line (bash). I'm not sure how to fix that or if I'm doing it wrong. Please advice.
Also, any tips of how to run this script over multiple systems on the same network?
Thanks a lot.
What I believe you'd want to do:
#!/bin/bash
source /bin/compilervars.sh intel64
file="$HOME/a.out"
if [ ! -f "$file" ]; then
icc code.c
fi
You would put this in a file and make it executable with chmod +x myscript. Then you would run it with ./myscript. Alternatively, you could just run it with bash myscript.
Your script makes little sense. The second line will open a new bash session, but it will just sit there until you exit it. Also, changing directories back and forth is very seldom required. To execute a single command in another directory, one usually does
( cd /other/place && mycommand )
The ( ... ) tells the shell that you'd like to do this in a sub-shell. The cd happens within that sub-shell and you don't have to cd back after it's done. If the cd fails, the command will not be run.
For example: You might want to make sure you're in $HOME when you compile the code:
if [ ! -f "$file" ]; then
( cd $HOME && icc code.c )
fi
... or even pick out the directory name from the variable file and use that:
if [ -f "$file" ]; then
( cd $(dirname "$file") && icc code.c )
fi
Assigning to a variable needs to happen as I wrote it, without spaces around the =.
Likewise, there needs to be spaces after if and inside [ ... ] as I wrote it above.
I also tend to use $HOME rather than ~ in scripts as it's more descriptive.
A shell script isn't a record of key strokes which are typed into a terminal. If you write a script like this:
command1
bash
command2
it does not mean that the script will switch to bash, and then execute command2 in the different shell. It means that bash will be run. If there is a controlling terminal, that bash will show you a prompt and wait for a command to be typed in. You will have to type exit to quit that bash. Only then will the original script then continue with command2.
There is no way to switch a script to a different shell halfway through. There are ways to simulate this. A script can re-execute itself using a different shell. In order to do that, the script has to contain logic to detect that it is being re-executed, so that it can prevent re-executing itself again, and to skip some code that shouldn't be run twice.
In this script, I implemented such a re-execution hack. It consists of these lines:
#
# The #!/bin/sh might be some legacy piece of crap,
# not even up to 1990 POSIX.2 spec. So the first step
# is to look for a better shell in some known places
# and re-execute ourselves with that interpreter.
#
if test x$txr_shell = x ; then
for shell in /bin/bash /usr/bin/bash /usr/xpg4/bin/sh ; do
if test -x $shell ; then
txr_shell=$shell
break
fi
done
if test x$txr_shell = x ; then
echo "No known POSIX shell found: falling back on /bin/sh, which may not work"
txr_shell=/bin/sh
fi
export txr_shell
exec $txr_shell $0 ${#+"$#"}
fi
The txr_shell variable (not a standard variable, my invention) is how this logic detects that it's been re-executed. If the variable doesn't exist then this is the original execution. When we re-execute we export txr_shell so the re-executed instance will then have this environment variable.
The variable also holds the path to the shell; that is used later in the script; it is passed through to a Makefile as the SHELL variable, so that make build recipes use that same shell. In the above logic, the contents of txr_shell don't matter; it's used as Boolean: either it exists or it doesn't.
The programming style in the above code snippet is deliberately coded to work on very old shells. That is why test x$txr_shell = x is used instead of the modern syntax [ -z "$txr_shell" ], and why ${#+"$#"} is used instead of just "$#".
This style is no longer used after this point in the script, because the
rest of the script runs in some good, reasonably modern shell thanks to the re-execution trick.
This question already has answers here:
Can I export a variable to the environment from a Bash script without sourcing it?
(13 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
The community reviewed whether to reopen this question last year and left it closed:
Original close reason(s) were not resolved
I'm trying to write a shell script that, when run, will set some environment variables that will stay set in the caller's shell.
setenv FOO foo
in csh/tcsh, or
export FOO=foo
in sh/bash only set it during the script's execution.
I already know that
source myscript
will run the commands of the script rather than launching a new shell, and that can result in setting the "caller's" environment.
But here's the rub:
I want this script to be callable from either bash or csh. In other words, I want users of either shell to be able to run my script and have their shell's environment changed. So 'source' won't work for me, since a user running csh can't source a bash script, and a user running bash can't source a csh script.
Is there any reasonable solution that doesn't involve having to write and maintain TWO versions on the script?
Use the "dot space script" calling syntax. For example, here's how to do it using the full path to a script:
. /path/to/set_env_vars.sh
And here's how to do it if you're in the same directory as the script:
. set_env_vars.sh
These execute the script under the current shell instead of loading another one (which is what would happen if you did ./set_env_vars.sh). Because it runs in the same shell, the environmental variables you set will be available when it exits.
This is the same thing as calling source set_env_vars.sh, but it's shorter to type and might work in some places where source doesn't.
Your shell process has a copy of the parent's environment and no access to the parent process's environment whatsoever. When your shell process terminates any changes you've made to its environment are lost. Sourcing a script file is the most commonly used method for configuring a shell environment, you may just want to bite the bullet and maintain one for each of the two flavors of shell.
You're not going to be able to modify the caller's shell because it's in a different process context. When child processes inherit your shell's variables, they're
inheriting copies themselves.
One thing you can do is to write a script that emits the correct commands for tcsh
or sh based how it's invoked. If you're script is "setit" then do:
ln -s setit setit-sh
and
ln -s setit setit-csh
Now either directly or in an alias, you do this from sh
eval `setit-sh`
or this from csh
eval `setit-csh`
setit uses $0 to determine its output style.
This is reminescent of how people use to get the TERM environment variable set.
The advantage here is that setit is just written in whichever shell you like as in:
#!/bin/bash
arg0=$0
arg0=${arg0##*/}
for nv in \
NAME1=VALUE1 \
NAME2=VALUE2
do
if [ x$arg0 = xsetit-sh ]; then
echo 'export '$nv' ;'
elif [ x$arg0 = xsetit-csh ]; then
echo 'setenv '${nv%%=*}' '${nv##*=}' ;'
fi
done
with the symbolic links given above, and the eval of the backquoted expression, this has the desired result.
To simplify invocation for csh, tcsh, or similar shells:
alias dosetit 'eval `setit-csh`'
or for sh, bash, and the like:
alias dosetit='eval `setit-sh`'
One nice thing about this is that you only have to maintain the list in one place.
In theory you could even stick the list in a file and put cat nvpairfilename between "in" and "do".
This is pretty much how login shell terminal settings used to be done: a script would output statments to be executed in the login shell. An alias would generally be used to make invocation simple, as in "tset vt100". As mentioned in another answer, there is also similar functionality in the INN UseNet news server.
In my .bash_profile I have :
# No Proxy
function noproxy
{
/usr/local/sbin/noproxy #turn off proxy server
unset http_proxy HTTP_PROXY https_proxy HTTPs_PROXY
}
# Proxy
function setproxy
{
sh /usr/local/sbin/proxyon #turn on proxy server
http_proxy=http://127.0.0.1:8118/
HTTP_PROXY=$http_proxy
https_proxy=$http_proxy
HTTPS_PROXY=$https_proxy
export http_proxy https_proxy HTTP_PROXY HTTPS_PROXY
}
So when I want to disable the proxy,
the function(s) run in the login shell and sets the variables
as expected and wanted.
It's "kind of" possible through using gdb and setenv(3), although I have a hard time recommending actually doing this. (Additionally, i.e. the most recent ubuntu won't actually let you do this without telling the kernel to be more permissive about ptrace, and the same may go for other distros as well).
$ cat setfoo
#! /bin/bash
gdb /proc/${PPID}/exe ${PPID} <<END >/dev/null
call setenv("foo", "bar", 0)
END
$ echo $foo
$ ./setfoo
$ echo $foo
bar
This works — it isn't what I'd use, but it 'works'. Let's create a script teredo to set the environment variable TEREDO_WORMS:
#!/bin/ksh
export TEREDO_WORMS=ukelele
exec $SHELL -i
It will be interpreted by the Korn shell, exports the environment variable, and then replaces itself with a new interactive shell.
Before running this script, we have SHELL set in the environment to the C shell, and the environment variable TEREDO_WORMS is not set:
% env | grep SHELL
SHELL=/bin/csh
% env | grep TEREDO
%
When the script is run, you are in a new shell, another interactive C shell, but the environment variable is set:
% teredo
% env | grep TEREDO
TEREDO_WORMS=ukelele
%
When you exit from this shell, the original shell takes over:
% exit
% env | grep TEREDO
%
The environment variable is not set in the original shell's environment. If you use exec teredo to run the command, then the original interactive shell is replaced by the Korn shell that sets the environment, and then that in turn is replaced by a new interactive C shell:
% exec teredo
% env | grep TEREDO
TEREDO_WORMS=ukelele
%
If you type exit (or Control-D), then your shell exits, probably logging you out of that window, or taking you back to the previous level of shell from where the experiments started.
The same mechanism works for Bash or Korn shell. You may find that the prompt after the exit commands appears in funny places.
Note the discussion in the comments. This is not a solution I would recommend, but it does achieve the stated purpose of a single script to set the environment that works with all shells (that accept the -i option to make an interactive shell). You could also add "$#" after the option to relay any other arguments, which might then make the shell usable as a general 'set environment and execute command' tool. You might want to omit the -i if there are other arguments, leading to:
#!/bin/ksh
export TEREDO_WORMS=ukelele
exec $SHELL "${#-'-i'}"
The "${#-'-i'}" bit means 'if the argument list contains at least one argument, use the original argument list; otherwise, substitute -i for the non-existent arguments'.
You should use modules, see http://modules.sourceforge.net/
EDIT: The modules package has not been updated since 2012 but still works ok for the basics. All the new features, bells and whistles happen in lmod this day (which I like it more): https://www.tacc.utexas.edu/research-development/tacc-projects/lmod
Another workaround that I don't see mentioned is to write the variable value to a file.
I ran into a very similar issue where I wanted to be able to run the last set test (instead of all my tests). My first plan was to write one command for setting the env variable TESTCASE, and then have another command that would use this to run the test. Needless to say that I had the same exact issue as you did.
But then I came up with this simple hack:
First command ( testset ):
#!/bin/bash
if [ $# -eq 1 ]
then
echo $1 > ~/.TESTCASE
echo "TESTCASE has been set to: $1"
else
echo "Come again?"
fi
Second command (testrun ):
#!/bin/bash
TESTCASE=$(cat ~/.TESTCASE)
drush test-run $TESTCASE
You can instruct the child process to print its environment variables (by calling "env"), then loop over the printed environment variables in the parent process and call "export" on those variables.
The following code is based on Capturing output of find . -print0 into a bash array
If the parent shell is the bash, you can use
while IFS= read -r -d $'\0' line; do
export "$line"
done < <(bash -s <<< 'export VARNAME=something; env -0')
echo $VARNAME
If the parent shell is the dash, then read does not provide the -d flag and the code gets more complicated
TMPDIR=$(mktemp -d)
mkfifo $TMPDIR/fifo
(bash -s << "EOF"
export VARNAME=something
while IFS= read -r -d $'\0' line; do
echo $(printf '%q' "$line")
done < <(env -0)
EOF
) > $TMPDIR/fifo &
while read -r line; do export "$(eval echo $line)"; done < $TMPDIR/fifo
rm -r $TMPDIR
echo $VARNAME
Under OS X bash you can do the following:
Create the bash script file to unset the variable
#!/bin/bash
unset http_proxy
Make the file executable
sudo chmod 744 unsetvar
Create alias
alias unsetvar='source /your/path/to/the/script/unsetvar'
It should be ready to use so long you have the folder containing your script file appended to the path.
It's not what I would call outstanding, but this also works if you need to call the script from the shell anyway. It's not a good solution, but for a single static environment variable, it works well enough.
1.) Create a script with a condition that exits either 0 (Successful) or 1 (Not successful)
if [[ $foo == "True" ]]; then
exit 0
else
exit 1
2.) Create an alias that is dependent on the exit code.
alias='myscript.sh && export MyVariable'
You call the alias, which calls the script, which evaluates the condition, which is required to exit zero via the '&&' in order to set the environment variable in the parent shell.
This is flotsam, but it can be useful in a pinch.
You can invoke another one Bash with the different bash_profile.
Also, you can create special bash_profile for using in multi-bashprofile environment.
Remember that you can use functions inside of bashprofile, and that functions will be avialable globally.
for example, "function user { export USER_NAME $1 }" can set variable in runtime, for example: user olegchir && env | grep olegchir
Another option is to use "Environment Modules" (http://modules.sourceforge.net/). This unfortunately introduces a third language into the mix. You define the environment with the language of Tcl, but there are a few handy commands for typical modifications (prepend vs. append vs set). You will also need to have environment modules installed. You can then use module load *XXX* to name the environment you want. The module command is basically a fancy alias for the eval mechanism described above by Thomas Kammeyer. The main advantage here is that you can maintain the environment in one language and rely on "Environment Modules" to translate it to sh, ksh, bash, csh, tcsh, zsh, python (?!?!!), etc.
I created a solution using pipes, eval and signal.
parent() {
if [ -z "$G_EVAL_FD" ]; then
die 1 "Rode primeiro parent_setup no processo pai"
fi
if [ $(ppid) = "$$" ]; then
"$#"
else
kill -SIGUSR1 $$
echo "$#">&$G_EVAL_FD
fi
}
parent_setup() {
G_EVAL_FD=99
tempfile=$(mktemp -u)
mkfifo "$tempfile"
eval "exec $G_EVAL_FD<>'$tempfile'"
rm -f "$tempfile"
trap "read CMD <&$G_EVAL_FD; eval \"\$CMD\"" USR1
}
parent_setup #on parent shell context
( A=1 ); echo $A # prints nothing
( parent A=1 ); echo $A # prints 1
It might work with any command.
I don't see any answer documenting how to work around this problem with cooperating processes. A common pattern with things like ssh-agent is to have the child process print an expression which the parent can eval.
bash$ eval $(shh-agent)
For example, ssh-agent has options to select Csh or Bourne-compatible output syntax.
bash$ ssh-agent
SSH2_AUTH_SOCK=/tmp/ssh-era/ssh2-10690-agent; export SSH2_AUTH_SOCK;
SSH2_AGENT_PID=10691; export SSH2_AGENT_PID;
echo Agent pid 10691;
(This causes the agent to start running, but doesn't allow you to actually use it, unless you now copy-paste this output to your shell prompt.) Compare:
bash$ ssh-agent -c
setenv SSH2_AUTH_SOCK /tmp/ssh-era/ssh2-10751-agent;
setenv SSH2_AGENT_PID 10752;
echo Agent pid 10752;
(As you can see, csh and tcsh uses setenv to set varibles.)
Your own program can do this, too.
bash$ foo=$(makefoo)
Your makefoo script would simply calculate and print the value, and let the caller do whatever they want with it -- assigning it to a variable is a common use case, but probably not something you want to hard-code into the tool which produces the value.
Technically, that is correct -- only 'eval' doesn't fork another shell. However, from the point of view of the application you're trying to run in the modified environment, the difference is nil: the child inherits the environment of its parent, so the (modified) environment is conveyed to all descending processes.
Ipso facto, the changed environment variable 'sticks' -- as long as you are running under the parent program/shell.
If it is absolutely necessary for the environment variable to remain after the parent (Perl or shell) has exited, it is necessary for the parent shell to do the heavy lifting. One method I've seen in the documentation is for the current script to spawn an executable file with the necessary 'export' language, and then trick the parent shell into executing it -- always being cognizant of the fact that you need to preface the command with 'source' if you're trying to leave a non-volatile version of the modified environment behind. A Kluge at best.
The second method is to modify the script that initiates the shell environment (.bashrc or whatever) to contain the modified parameter. This can be dangerous -- if you hose up the initialization script it may make your shell unavailable the next time it tries to launch. There are plenty of tools for modifying the current shell; by affixing the necessary tweaks to the 'launcher' you effectively push those changes forward as well.
Generally not a good idea; if you only need the environment changes for a particular application suite, you'll have to go back and return the shell launch script to its pristine state (using vi or whatever) afterwards.
In short, there are no good (and easy) methods. Presumably this was made difficult to ensure the security of the system was not irrevocably compromised.
The short answer is no, you cannot alter the environment of the parent process, but it seems like what you want is an environment with custom environment variables and the shell that the user has chosen.
So why not simply something like
#!/usr/bin/env bash
FOO=foo $SHELL
Then when you are done with the environment, just exit.
You could always use aliases
alias your_env='source ~/scripts/your_env.sh'
I did this many years ago. If I rememeber correctly, I included an alias in each of .bashrc and .cshrc, with parameters, aliasing the respective forms of setting the environment to a common form.
Then the script that you will source in any of the two shells has a command with that last form, that is suitable aliased in each shell.
If I find the concrete aliases, I will post them.
Other than writings conditionals depending on what $SHELL/$TERM is set to, no. What's wrong with using Perl? It's pretty ubiquitous (I can't think of a single UNIX variant that doesn't have it), and it'll spare you the trouble.
When I type echo $0 I see -
I expect to see bash or some filename, what does it mean if I just get a "-"?
A hyphen in front of $0 means that this program is a login shell.
note: $0 does not always contain accurate path to the running executable as there is a way to override it when calling execve(2).
I get '-bash', a few weeks ago, I played with modifying a process name visible when you run ps or top/htop or echo $0. To answer you question directly, I don't think it means anything. Echo is a built-in function of bash, so when it checks the arguments list, bash is actually doing the checking, and seeing itself there.
Your intuition is correct, if you wrote echo $0 in a script file, and ran that, you would see the script's filename.
So based on one of your comments, you're really want to know how to determine what shell you're running; you assumed $0 was the solution, and asked about that, but as you've seen $0 won't reliably tell you what you need to know.
If you're running bash, then several unexported variables will be set, including $BASH_VERSION. If you're running tcsh, then the shell variables $tcsh and $version will be set. (Note that $version is an excessively generic name; I've run into problems where some system-wide startup script sets it and clobbers the tcsh-specific variable. But $tcsh should be reliable.)
The real problem, though, is that bash and tcsh syntax are mostly incompatible. It might be possible to write a script that can execute when invoked (via . or source) from either tcsh or bash, but it would be difficult and ugly.
The usual approach is to have separate setup files, one for each shell you use. For example, if you're running bash you might run
. ~/setup.bash
or
. ~/setup.sh
and if you're running tcsh you might run
source ~/setup.tcsh
or
source ~/setup.csh
The .sh or .csh versions refer to the ancestors of both shells; it makes sense to use those suffixes if you're not using any bash-specific or tcsh-specific features.
But that requires knowing which shell you're running.
You could probably set up an alias in your .cshrc, .tcshrc, or.login, and an alias or function in your.profile,.bash_profile, or.bashrc` that will invoke whichever script you need.
Or if you want to do the setup every time you login, or every time you start a new interactive shell, you can put the commands directly in the appropriate shell startup file(s). Of course the commands will be different for tcsh vs. bash.
Can you edit a shell script while it's running and have the changes affect the running script?
I'm curious about the specific case of a csh script I have that batch runs a bunch of different build flavors and runs all night. If something occurs to me mid operation, I'd like to go in and add additional commands, or comment out un-executed ones.
If not possible, is there any shell or batch-mechanism that would allow me to do this?
Of course I've tried it, but it will be hours before I see if it worked or not, and I'm curious about what's happening or not happening behind the scenes.
It does affect, at least bash in my environment, but in very unpleasant way. See these codes. First a.sh:
#!/bin/sh
echo "First echo"
read y
echo "$y"
echo "That's all."
b.sh:
#!/bin/sh
echo "First echo"
read y
echo "Inserted"
echo "$y"
# echo "That's all."
Do
$ cp a.sh run.sh
$ ./run.sh
$ # open another terminal
$ cp b.sh run.sh # while 'read' is in effect
$ # Then type "hello."
In my case, the output is always:
hello
hello
That's all.
That's all.
(Of course it's far better to automate it, but the above example is readable.)
[edit] This is unpredictable, thus dangerous. The best workaround is , as described here put all in a brace, and before the closing brace, put "exit". Read the linked answer well to avoid pitfalls.
[added] The exact behavior depends on one extra newline, and perhaps also on your Unix flavor, filesystem, etc. If you simply want to see some influences, simply add "echo foo/bar" to b.sh before and/or after the "read" line.
Try this... create a file called bash-is-odd.sh:
#!/bin/bash
echo "echo yes i do odd things" >> bash-is-odd.sh
That demonstrates that bash is, indeed, interpreting the script "as you go". Indeed, editing a long-running script has unpredictable results, inserting random characters etc. Why? Because bash reads from the last byte position, so editing shifts the location of the current character being read.
Bash is, in a word, very, very unsafe because of this "feature". svn and rsync when used with bash scripts are particularly troubling, because by default they "merge" the results... editing in place. rsync has a mode that fixes this. svn and git do not.
I present a solution. Create a file called /bin/bashx:
#!/bin/bash
source "$1"
Now use #!/bin/bashx on your scripts and always run them with bashx instead of bash. This fixes the issue - you can safely rsync your scripts.
Alternative (in-line) solution proposed/tested by #AF7:
{
# your script
exit $?
}
Curly braces protect against edits, and exit protects against appends. Of course, we'd all be much better off if bash came with an option, like -w (whole file), or something that did this.
Break your script into functions, and each time a function is called you source it from a separate file. Then you could edit the files at any time and your running script will pick up the changes next time it gets sourced.
foo() {
source foo.sh
}
foo
Good question!
Hope this simple script helps
#!/bin/sh
echo "Waiting..."
echo "echo \"Success! Edits to a .sh while it executes do affect the executing script! I added this line to myself during execution\" " >> ${0}
sleep 5
echo "When I was run, this was the last line"
It does seem under linux that changes made to an executing .sh are enacted by the executing script, if you can type fast enough!
An interesting side note - if you are running a Python script it does not change. (This is probably blatantly obvious to anyone who understands how shell runs Python scripts, but thought it might be a useful reminder for someone looking for this functionality.)
I created:
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import time
print('Starts')
time.sleep(10)
print('Finishes unchanged')
Then in another shell, while this is sleeping, edit the last line. When this completes it displays the unaltered line, presumably because it is running a .pyc? Same happens on Ubuntu and macOS.
I don't have csh installed, but
#!/bin/sh
echo Waiting...
sleep 60
echo Change didn't happen
Run that, quickly edit the last line to read
echo Change happened
Output is
Waiting...
/home/dave/tmp/change.sh: 4: Syntax error: Unterminated quoted string
Hrmph.
I guess edits to the shell scripts don't take effect until they're rerun.
If this is all in a single script, then no it will not work. However, if you set it up as a driver script calling sub-scripts, then you might be able to change a sub-script before it's called, or before it's called again if you're looping, and in that case I believe those changes would be reflected in the execution.
I'm hearing no... but what about with some indirection:
BatchRunner.sh
Command1.sh
Command2.sh
Command1.sh
runSomething
Command2.sh
runSomethingElse
Then you should be able to edit the contents of each command file before BatchRunner gets to it right?
OR
A cleaner version would have BatchRunner look to a single file where it would consecutively run one line at a time. Then you should be able to edit this second file while the first is running right?
Use Zsh instead for your scripting.
AFAICT, Zsh does not exhibit this frustrating behavior.
usually, it uncommon to edit your script while its running. All you have to do is to put in control check for your operations. Use if/else statements to check for conditions. If something fail, then do this, else do that. That's the way to go.
Scripts don't work that way; the executing copy is independent from the source file that you are editing. Next time the script is run, it will be based on the most recently saved version of the source file.
It might be wise to break out this script into multiple files, and run them individually. This will reduce the execution time to failure. (ie, split the batch into one build flavor scripts, running each one individually to see which one is causing the trouble).
This question already has answers here:
Multiple commands in an alias for bash
(10 answers)
Closed 4 years ago.
I know how to configure aliases in bash, but is there a way to configure an alias for a sequence of commands?
I.e say I want one command to change to a particular directory, then run another command.
In addition, is there a way to setup a command that runs "sudo mycommand", then enters the password? In the MS-DOS days I'd be looking for a .bat file but I'm unsure of the linux (or in this case Mac OSX) equivalent.
For chaining a sequence of commands, try this:
alias x='command1;command2;command3;'
Or you can do this:
alias x='command1 && command2 && command3'
The && makes it only execute subsequent commands if the previous returns successful.
Also for entering passwords interactively, or interfacing with other programs like that, check out expect. (http://expect.nist.gov/)
You mention BAT files so perhaps what you want is to write a shell script. If so then just enter the commands you want line-by-line into a file like so:
command1
command2
and ask bash to execute the file:
bash myscript.sh
If you want to be able to invoke the script directly without typing "bash" then add the following line as the first line of the file:
#! /bin/bash
command1
command2
Then mark the file as executable:
chmod 755 myscript.sh
Now you can run it just like any other executable:
./myscript.sh
Note that unix doesn't really care about file extensions. You can simply name the file "myscript" without the ".sh" extension if you like. It's that special first line that is important. For example, if you want to write your script in the Perl programming language instead of bash the first line would be:
#! /usr/bin/perl
That first line tells your shell what interpreter to invoke to execute your script.
Also, if you now copy your script into one of the directories listed in the $PATH environment variable then you can call it from anywhere by simply typing its file name:
myscript.sh
Even tab-completion works. Which is why I usually include a ~/bin directory in my $PATH so that I can easily install personal scripts. And best of all, once you have a bunch of personal scripts that you are used to having you can easily port them to any new unix machine by copying your personal ~/bin directory.
it's probably easier to define functions for these types of things than aliases, keeps things more readable if you want to do more than a command or two:
In your .bashrc
perform_my_command() {
pushd /some_dir
my_command "$#"
popd
}
Then on the command line you can simply do:
perform_my_command my_parameter my_other_parameter "my quoted parameter"
You could do anything you like in a function, call other functions, etc.
You may want to have a look at the Advanced Bash Scripting Guide for in depth knowledge.
For the alias you can use this:
alias sequence='command1 -args; command2 -args;'
or if the second command must be executed only if the first one succeeds use:
alias sequence='command1 -args && command2 -args'
Your best bet is probably a shell function instead of an alias if the logic becomes more complex or if you need to add parameters (though bash supports aliases parameters).
This function can be defined in your .profile or .bashrc. The subshell is to avoid changing your working directory.
function myfunc {
( cd /tmp; command )
}
then from your command prompt
$ myfunc
For your second question you can just add your command to /etc/sudoers (if you are completely sure of what you are doing)
myuser ALL = NOPASSWD: \
/bin/mycommand
Apropos multiple commands in a single alias, you can use one of the logical operators to combine them. Here's one to switch to a directory and do an ls on it
alias x="cd /tmp && ls -al"
Another option is to use a shell function. These are sh/zsh/bash commands. I don't know enough of other shells to be sure if they work.
As for the sudo thing, if you want that (although I don't think it's a good idea), the right way to go is to alter the /etc/sudoers file to get what you want.
You can embed the function declaration followed by the function in the alias itself, like so:
alias my_alias='f() { do_stuff_with "$#" (arguments)" ...; }; f'
The benefit of this approach over just declaring the function by itself is that you can have a peace of mind that your function is not going to be overriden by some other script you're sourcing (or using .), which might use its own helper under the same name.
E.g., Suppose you have a script init-my-workspace.sh that you're calling like . init-my-workspace.sh or source init-my-workspace.sh whose purpose is to set or export a bunch of environment variables (e.g., JAVA_HOME, PYTHON_PATH etc.). If you happen to have a function my_alias inside there, as well, then you're out of luck as the latest function declaration withing the same shell instance wins.
Conversely, aliases have separate namespace and even in case of name clash, they are looked up first. Therefore, for customization relevant to interactive usage, you should only ever use aliases.
Finally, note that the practice of putting all the aliases in the same place (e.g., ~/.bash_aliases) enables you to easily spot any name clashes.
you can also write a shell function; example for " cd " and "ls " combo here