im using system command in perl to execute su command like this
system("su -");
The above command works fine..
But if my command is this
su -c "echo hello"
Then how do i embed this command into system command of perl?
system can work with a list rather than a single string:
system LIST
system PROGRAM LIST
[...] Note that argument processing varies depending on the number of arguments. If there is more than one argument in LIST, or if LIST is an array with more than one value, starts the program given by the first element of the list with arguments given by the rest of the list.
So you could avoid the nested quote problems with this:
system('su', '-c', 'echo hello')
You simple need quote escaping, either by using a different quote set:
system('su -c "echo hello"');
Or by "escaping" the quotes themselves:
system("su -c \"echo hello\"");
Or as individual arguments, as mu is too short points out:
system("su", "-c", "echo hello");
Related
When i run from bash:
# su -c "psql -d mapping -c \"INSERT INTO mapping (ip,username) VALUES('1.2.3.4','test');\"" postgres
It works fine, but when i try from python:
subprocess.run("su -c \"psql -d mapping -c \"INSERT INTO mapping (ip,username) VALUES('1.2.3.4','test');\"\" postgres")
It fails, i have tried different quotation marks and all failing. Could you please help?
There are two solutions, depending on whether or not you use the shell from Python. The trivial but inefficient solution is to pass the string with shell=True and basically just add Python quoting around it.
subprocess.run(r'''su -c "psql -d mapping -c \"INSERT INTO mapping (ip,username) VALUES('1.2.3.4','test');\"" postgres''', shell=True,
# For good measure, you should check its status
check=True)
More efficiently and perhaps in fact more readably, you can remove the shell from the equation, and split the command into strings yourself.
subprocess.run([
'su', '-c',
# The argument to "su -c" should be one string
# Because we escaped the shell, the double quotes don't need escaping
'''psql -d mapping -c "INSERT INTO mapping (ip,username) VALUES('1.2.3.4','test');"''',
'postgres'],
check=True)
Notice how with shell=True the first argument is a string which gets passed to the shell, whereas without it, you pass a list of tokens directly to the OS-level exec() or (somewhat less straightforwardly on Windows) CreateProcess(). Notice also how in the first instance I used an r'...' string to avoid having Python meddle with the backslashes in the string.
I have a Bash script which generates, stores and modifies values in an array. These values are later used as arguments for a command.
For a MCVE I thought of an arbitrary command bash -c 'echo 0="$0" ; echo 1="$1"' which explains my problem. I will call my command with two arguments -option1=withoutspace and -option2="with space". So it would look like this
> bash -c 'echo 0="$0" ; echo 1="$1"' -option1=withoutspace -option2="with space"
if the call to the command would be typed directly into the shell. It prints
0=-option1=withoutspace
1=-option2=with space
In my Bash script, the arguments are part of an array. However
#!/bin/bash
ARGUMENTS=()
ARGUMENTS+=('-option1=withoutspace')
ARGUMENTS+=('-option2="with space"')
bash -c 'echo 0="$0" ; echo 1="$1"' "${ARGUMENTS[#]}"
prints
0=-option1=withoutspace
1=-option2="with space"
which still shows the double quotes (because they are interpreted literally?). What works is
#!/bin/bash
ARGUMENTS=()
ARGUMENTS+=('-option1=withoutspace')
ARGUMENTS+=('-option2=with space')
bash -c 'echo 0="$0" ; echo 1="$1"' "${ARGUMENTS[#]}"
which prints again
0=-option1=withoutspace
1=-option2=with space
What do I have to change to make ARGUMENTS+=('-option2="with space"') work as well as ARGUMENTS+=('-option2=with space')?
(Maybe it's even entirely wrong to store arguments for a command in an array? I'm open for suggestions.)
Get rid of the single quotes. Write the options exactly as you would on the command line.
ARGUMENTS+=(-option1=withoutspace)
ARGUMENTS+=(-option2="with space")
Note that this is exactly equivalent to your second option:
ARGUMENTS+=('-option1=withoutspace')
ARGUMENTS+=('-option2=with space')
-option2="with space" and '-option2=with space' both evaluate to the same string. They're two ways of writing the same thing.
(Maybe it's even entirely wrong to store arguments for a command in an array? I'm open for suggestions.)
It's the exact right thing to do. Arrays are perfect for this. Using a flat string would be a mistake.
I have a BASH script that has a long set of arguments and two ways of calling it:
my_script --option1 value --option2 value ... etc
or
my_script val1 val2 val3 ..... valn
This script in turn compiles and runs a large FORTRAN code suite that eventually produces a netcdf file as output. I already have all the metadata in the netcdf output global attributes, but it would be really nice to also include the full run command one used to create that experiment. Thus another user who receives the netcdf file could simply reenter the run command to rerun the experiment, without having to piece together all the options.
So that is a long way of saying, in my BASH script, how do I get the last command entered from the parent shell and put it in a variable? i.e. the script is asking "how was I called?"
I could try to piece it together from the option list, but the very long option list and two interface methods would make this long and arduous, and I am sure there is a simple way.
I found this helpful page:
BASH: echoing the last command run
but this only seems to work to get the last command executed within the script itself. The asker also refers to use of history, but the answers seem to imply that the history will only contain the command after the programme has completed.
Many thanks if any of you have any idea.
You can try the following:
myInvocation="$(printf %q "$BASH_SOURCE")$((($#)) && printf ' %q' "$#")"
$BASH_SOURCE refers to the running script (as invoked), and $# is the array of arguments; (($#)) && ensures that the following printf command is only executed if at least 1 argument was passed; printf %q is explained below.
While this won't always be a verbatim copy of your command line, it'll be equivalent - the string you get is reusable as a shell command.
chepner points out in a comment that this approach will only capture what the original arguments were ultimately expanded to:
For instance, if the original command was my_script $USER "$(date +%s)", $myInvocation will not reflect these arguments as-is, but will rather contain what the shell expanded them to; e.g., my_script jdoe 1460644812
chepner also points that out that getting the actual raw command line as received by the parent process will be (next to) impossible. Do tell me if you know of a way.
However, if you're prepared to ask users to do extra work when invoking your script or you can get them to invoke your script through an alias you define - which is obviously tricky - there is a solution; see bottom.
Note that use of printf %q is crucial to preserving the boundaries between arguments - if your original arguments had embedded spaces, something like $0 $* would result in a different command.
printf %q also protects against other shell metacharacters (e.g., |) embedded in arguments.
printf %q quotes the given argument for reuse as a single argument in a shell command, applying the necessary quoting; e.g.:
$ printf %q 'a |b'
a\ \|b
a\ \|b is equivalent to single-quoted string 'a |b' from the shell's perspective, but this example shows how the resulting representation is not necessarily the same as the input representation.
Incidentally, ksh and zsh also support printf %q, and ksh actually outputs 'a |b' in this case.
If you're prepared to modify how your script is invoked, you can pass $BASH_COMMANDas an extra argument: $BASH_COMMAND contains the raw[1]
command line of the currently executing command.
For simplicity of processing inside the script, pass it as the first argument (note that the double quotes are required to preserve the value as a single argument):
my_script "$BASH_COMMAND" --option1 value --option2
Inside your script:
# The *first* argument is what "$BASH_COMMAND" expanded to,
# i.e., the entire (alias-expanded) command line.
myInvocation=$1 # Save the command line in a variable...
shift # ... and remove it from "$#".
# Now process "$#", as you normally would.
Unfortunately, there are only two options when it comes to ensuring that your script is invoked this way, and they're both suboptimal:
The end user has to invoke the script this way - which is obviously tricky and fragile (you could however, check in your script whether the first argument contains the script name and error out, if not).
Alternatively, provide an alias that wraps the passing of $BASH_COMMAND as follows:
alias my_script='/path/to/my_script "$BASH_COMMAND"'
The tricky part is that this alias must be defined in all end users' shell initialization files to ensure that it's available.
Also, inside your script, you'd have to do extra work to re-transform the alias-expanded version of the command line into its aliased form:
# The *first* argument is what "$BASH_COMMAND" expanded to,
# i.e., the entire (alias-expanded) command line.
# Here we also re-transform the alias-expanded command line to
# its original aliased form, by replacing everything up to and including
# "$BASH_COMMMAND" with the alias name.
myInvocation=$(sed 's/^.* "\$BASH_COMMAND"/my_script/' <<<"$1")
shift # Remove the first argument from "$#".
# Now process "$#", as you normally would.
Sadly, wrapping the invocation via a script or function is not an option, because the $BASH_COMMAND truly only ever reports the current command's command line, which in the case of a script or function wrapper would be the line inside that wrapper.
[1] The only thing that gets expanded are aliases, so if you invoked your script via an alias, you'll still see the underlying script in $BASH_COMMAND, but that's generally desirable, given that aliases are user-specific.
All other arguments and even input/output redirections, including process substitutiions <(...) are reflected as-is.
"$0" contains the script's name, "$#" contains the parameters.
Do you mean something like echo $0 $*?
command 'which' shows the link to a command.
command 'less' open the file.
How can I 'less' the file as the output of 'which'?
I don't want to use two commands like below to do it.
=>which script
/file/to/script/fiel
=>less /file/to/script/fiel
This is a use case for command substitution:
less -- "$(which commandname)"
That said, if your shell is bash, consider using type -P instead, which (unlike the external command which) is built into the shell:
less -- "$(type -P commandname)"
Note the quotes: These are important for reliable operation. Without them, the command may not work correctly if the filename contains characters inside IFS (by default, whitespace) or can be evaluated as a glob expression.
The double dashes are likewise there for correctness: Any argument after them is treated as positional (as per POSIX Utility Syntax Guidelines), so even if a filename starting with a dash were to be returned (however unlikely this may be), it ensures that less treats that as a filename rather than as the beginning of a sequence of options or flags.
You may also wish to consider honoring the user's pager selection via the environment variable $PAGER, and using type without -P to look for aliases, shell functions and builtins:
cmdsource() {
local sourcefile
if sourcefile="$(type -P -- "$1")"; then
"${PAGER:-less}" -- "$sourcefile"
else
echo "Unable to find source for $1" >&2
echo "...checking for a shell builtin:" >&2
type -- "$1"
fi
}
This defines a function you can run:
cmdsource commandname
You should be able to just pipe it over, try this:
which script | less
I have been experimenting with Haskell. I am trying to write a web crawler and I need to use external curl binary (due to some proxy settings, curl needs to have some special arguments which seem to be impossible/hard to set inside the haskell code, so i rather just pass it as a command line option. but that is another story...)
In the code at the bottom, if I change the marked line with curl instead of curl --help the output renders properly and gives:
"curl: try 'curl --help' or 'curl --manual' for more information
"
otherwise the string is empty - as the `curl --help' response is multiline.
I suspect that in haskell the buffer is cleared with every new line. (same goes for other simple shell commands like ls versus ls -l etc.)
How do I fix it?
The code:
import System.Process
import System.IO
main = do
let sp = (proc "curl --help"[]){std_out=CreatePipe} -- *** THIS LINE ***
(_,Just out_h,_,_)<- createProcess sp
out <-hGetContents out_h
print out
proc takes as a first argument the name of the executable, not a shell command. That, is when you use proc "foo bar" you are not referring to a foo executable, but to an executable named exactly foo bar, with the space in its file name.
This is a useful feature in practice, because sometimes you do have spaces in there (e.g. on Windows you might have c:\Program Files\Foo\Foo.exe). Using a shell command you would have to escape spaces in your command string. Worse, a few other characters need to be escaped as well, and it's cumbersome to check what exactly those are. proc sidesteps the issue by not using the shell at all but passing the string as it is to the OS.
For the executable arguments, proc takes a separate argument list. E.g.
proc "c:\\Program Files\\Foo\\Foo.exe" ["hello world!%$"]
Note that the arguments need no escaping as well.
If you want to pass arguments to curl you have to pass that it in the list:
sp = (proc "/usr/bin/curl" ["--help"]) {std_out=CreatePipe}
Then you will get the complete output in the entire string.