I want to run a command in Linux after completion of another command (without using sleep).
Example : i run a command for print contents of file after 3 days so i want that after 3 days when file is completely printed then my other command runs.
One method has already been mentioned to you if you want successful completion of 1st and afterwards only the 2nd command should execute then you can use & . Ex - cmd1 && cmd2 . If there is something else that you need, adding more context would be better.
I want to prevent a bash command from executing that has been chained using ; from running while the previous command is still running.
e.g. I write and submit command a; command b, but while command a is running I change my mind and want to prevent command b from running.
I cannot use kill because the subsequent command is not actually executing. Does bash have a queue of commands that can be manipulated?
To clarify, I am sure it is possible to make a new script or something that would allow me to create a queue, but that is not what this question is about. I specifically want to know if bash can prevent commands after a semicolon from running after I've 'submitted' them.
Consider these two scripts:
runner.sh
#!/bin/bash
while true
do
next_command=$(head -1 next_commands.list)
$next_command
sleep 60 #added to simulate processing time
done
next_commands.list
id
ls
echo hello
You can modify the content of the next_commands.list file to create a type of queue of which commands should be executed next.
I would like to configure my bash in a way so that I react on the event that the user enters a command. The moment they press Enter I would like my bash to run a script I installed first (analog to any PROMPT_COMMAND which is run each time a prompt is given out). This script should be able to
see what was entered,
maybe change it,
maybe even make the shell ignore it (i. e. make it not execute the line),
decide on whether the text shall be inserted in the history or not,
and maybe similar things.
I have not found a proper way to do this. My current implementations are all flawed and use things like debug traps to intervene before executing a command or (HISTTIMEFORMAT='%s '; history 1) to ask the history after the command execution is complete about things when the command was started etc (but that is only hindsight which is not really what I want).
I'd expect something like a COMMAND_INTERCEPTION variable which would work similar to PROMPT_COMMAND but I'm not able to find anything like it.
I also considered to use command line completion to achieve my goal but wasn't able to find anything about reacting on sending a finished command in this, but maybe I just didn't find it.
Any help appreciated :)
You can use the DEBUG trap and the extdebug feature, and peek into BASH_COMMAND from the trap handler to see the running command. (Though as noted in comments, the debug trap is sprung on every simple command, not every command line. Also subshells elude it.)
The debug handler can prevent the command from running, but can't change it directly. Though of course you could run any command inside the debugger, possibly using BASH_COMMAND and eval to build it and then tell the shell to ignore the original command.
This would prevent running anything starting with ls:
$ preventls() { case "$BASH_COMMAND" in ls*) echo "no!"; return 1 ;; esac; }
$ shopt -s extdebug
$ trap preventls DEBUG
$ ls -l
no!
Use trap - DEBUG to remove the trap. Tested on Bash 4.3.30.
I have a testcase containing multiple Execute Commands (SSH Library) which are calling different commands in Linux environment. The main thing I would like to do is to run some of them in parallel. By default Robot performs one command and after it finishes, performs the next one.
As for me it is not a good behavior, I would like to have my command executed during execution of previous one. For example:
Execute Command ./script.sh
Execute Command ./script_parallel.sh
What I would like Robot to do:
Execute script.sh
During execution perform script_parallel.sh (which will finish before script.sh finishes)
Finish script.sh
Will it be possible to use GNU Parallel?
Execute Command parallel ::: ./script.sh ./script_parallel.sh
Have you tried Start command? It starts the command in background and returns immediately. To verify successful execution of commands you need Read Command Output.
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).