I'm running a number of ssh commands in a background. When the triggered-via-ssh
command finishes to run, the appropriate background ssh process doesn't get
terminated and its ps -l output shows 'finish' for WCHAN and T for 'state'.
So why the triggering process is not terminated and what does it mean 'finish' value
for WCHAN?
Thanks a lot
The state "T" means that the process was suspended. Since you said you ran it in the background, this may be due to reading tty input (or writing tty output if stty tostop is set). If the program does not require any input, use the ssh -n option to avoid this.
Related
I want to monitor all the running processes using strace and when a process ends the output of the strace should be sent to a file.
And how to find every running proc PID. I also want to include process name in the output file.
$ sudo strace -p 1725 -o firefox_trace.txt
$ tail -f firefox_trace.txt
1725 would be the PID of the proccess you want to monitor (you can find the PID with "ps -C firefox-bin", for firefox in the example)
And firefox_trace.txt would be the output file !
The way to got would be to find every running proc PID, and use the command to write them in the output file !
Considering the doc,
-p pid
Attach to the process with the process ID pid and begin tracing. The
trace may be terminated at any time by a keyboard interrupt signal (
CTRL -C). strace will respond by detaching itself from the traced
process(es) leaving it (them) to continue running. Multiple -p options
can be used to attach to up to 32 processes in addition to command
(which is optional if at least one -p option is given).
Use -o to store the output to the file, or 2>&1 to redirect standard error to output, so you can filter it (grep) or redirect it into file (> file).
To monitor process without knowing its PID, but name, you can use pgrep command, e.g.
strace -p $(pgrep command) -o file.out
where command is your name of process (e.g. php, Chrome, etc.).
To learn more about parameters, check man strace.
I'm new in linux and I'm building a program that receives the name of a process, gets its PID (i have no problem with that part) and then pass the PID to the kill command but its not working. It goes something like this:
read -p "Process to kill: " proceso
proid= pidof $proceso
echo "$proid"
kill $proid
Can someone tell me why it isn't killing it ? I know that there are some other ways to do it, even with the PID, but none of them seems to work for me. I believe it's some kind of problem with the Bash language (which I just started learning).
Instead of this:
proid= pidof $proceso
You probably meant this:
proid=$(pidof $proceso)
Even so,
the program might not get killed.
By default, kill PID sends the TERM signal to the specified process,
giving it a chance to shut down in an orderly manner,
for example clean up resources it's using.
The strongest signal to send a process to kill without graceful cleanup is KILL, using kill -KILL PID or kill -9 PID.
I believe it's some kind of problem with the bash language (which I just started learning).
The original line you posted, proid= pidof $proceso should raise an error,
and Bash would print an error message about it.
Debugging problems starts by reading and understanding the error messages the software is trying to tell you.
kill expects you to tell it **how to kill*, so there must be 64 different ways to kill your process :) They have names and numbers. The most lethal is -9. Some interesting ones include:
SIGKILL - The SIGKILL (also -9) signal forces the process to stop executing immediately. The program cannot ignore this signal. This process does not get to clean-up either.
SIGHUP - The SIGHUP signal disconnects a process from the parent process. This an also be used to restart processes. For example, "killall -SIGUP compiz" will restart Compiz. This is useful for daemons with memory leaks.
SIGINT - This signal is the same as pressing ctrl-c. On some systems, "delete" + "break" sends the same signal to the process. The process is interrupted and stopped. However, the process can ignore this signal.
SIGQUIT - This is like SIGINT with the ability to make the process produce a core dump.
use the following command to display the port and PID of the process:
sudo netstat -plten
AND THEN
kill -9 PID
Here is an example to kill a process running on port 8283 and has PID=25334
You have to send the SIGKILL flag with the kill statement.
kill -9 [pid]
If you don't the operating system will choose to kill the process at its convenience, SIGKILL (-9) will tell the os to kill the process NOW without ignoring the command until later.
Try this
kill -9
It will kill any process with PID given in brackets
Try "kill -9 $proid" or "kill -SIGKILL $proid" commands. If you want more information, click.
Based on what you have there, it looks like you aren't getting the actual PID in your proid variable. If you want to capture the output of pidof, you will need to enclose that command in backtics for the old form of command substitution ...
proid=`pidof $proceso`
... or like so for the new form of command substitution.
proid=$(pidof $proceso)
I had a similar problem, only wanting to run monitor (Video surveillance) for several hours a day.
Wrote two sh scripts;
cat startmotion.sh
#!/bin/sh
motion -c /home/username/.config/motion/motion.conf
And the second;
cat killmotion.sh
#!/bin/sh
OA=$(cat /var/run/motion/motion.pid)
kill -9 $OA
These were called from crontab at the scheduled time
ctontab -e
0 15 * * * /home/username/startmotion.sh
0 17 * * * /home/username/killmotion.sh
Very simple, but that's all I needed.
I have a bash script running on Ubuntu.
Is it possible to see the line/command executed now without script restart.
The issue is that script sometimes never exits. This is really hard to reproduce (now I caught it), so I can't just stop the script and start the debugging.
Any help would be really appreciated
P.S. Script logic is hard to understand, so I can't to figure out why it's frozen by power of thoughts.
Try to find the process id (pid) of the shell, you may use ps -ef | grep <script_name>
Let's set this pid in the shell variable $PID.
Find all the child processes of this $PID by:
ps --ppid $PID
You might find one or more (if for example it's stuck in a pipelined series of commands). Repeat this command couple of times. If it doesn't change this means the script is stuck in certain command. In this case, you may attach trace command to the running child process:
sudo strace -p $PID
This will show you what is being executed, either indefinite loop (like reading from a pipe) or waiting on some event that never happens.
In case you find ps --ppid $PID changes, this indicates that your script is advancing but it's stuck somewhere, e.g. local loop in the script. From the changing commands, it can give you a hint where in the script it's looping.
I would like to spawn a process suspended, possibly in the context of another user (e.g. via sudo -u ...), set up some iptables rules for the spawned process, continue running the process, and remove the iptable rules when the process exists.
Is there any standart means (bash, corutils, etc.) that allows me to achieve the above? In particular, how can I spawn a process in a suspended state and get its pid?
Write a wrapper script start-stopped.sh like this:
#!/bin/sh
kill -STOP $$ # suspend myself
# ... until I receive SIGCONT
exec $# # exec argument list
And then call it like:
sudo -u $SOME_USER start-stopped.sh mycommand & # start mycommand in stopped state
MYCOMMAND_PID=$!
setup_iptables $MYCOMMAND_PID # use its PID to setup iptables
sudo -u $SOME_USER kill -CONT $MYCOMMAND_PID # make mycommand continue
wait $MYCOMMAND_PID # wait for its termination
MYCOMMAND_EXIT_STATUS=$?
teardown_iptables # remove iptables rules
report $MYCOMMAND_EXIT_STATUS # report errors, if necessary
All this is overkill, however. You don't need to spawn your process in a suspended state to get the job done. Just make a wrapper script setup_iptables_and_start:
#!/bin/sh
setup_iptables $$ # use my own PID to setup iptables
exec sudo -u $SOME_USER $# # exec'ed command will have same PID
And then call it like
setup_iptables_and_start mycommand || report errors
teardown_iptables
You can write a C wrapper for your program that will do something like this :
fork and print child pid.
In the child, wait for user to press Enter. This puts the child in sleep and you can add the rules with the pid.
Once rules are added, user presses enter. The child runs your original program, either using exec or system.
Will this work?
Edit:
Actually you can do above procedure with a shell script. Try following bash script:
#!/bin/bash
echo "Pid is $$"
echo -n "Press Enter.."
read
exec $#
You can run this as /bin/bash ./run.sh <your command>
One way to do it is to enlist gdb to pause the program at the start of its main function (using the command "break main"). This will guarantee that the process is suspended fast enough (although some initialisation routines can run before main, they probably won't do anything relevant). However, for this you will need debugging information for the program you want to start suspended.
I suggest you try this manually first, see how it works, and then work out how to script what you've done.
Alternatively, it may be possible to constrain the process (if indeed that is what you're trying to do!) without using iptables, using SELinux or a ptrace-based tool like sydbox instead.
I suppose you could write a util yourself that forks, and wherein the child of the fork suspends itself just before doing an exec. Otherwise, consider using an LD_PRELOAD lib to do your 'custom' business.
If you care about making that secure, you should probably look at bigger guns (with chroot, perhaps paravirtualization, user mode linux etc. etc);
Last tip: if you don't mind doing some more coding, the ptrace interface should allow you to do what you describe (since it is used to implement debuggers with)
You probably need the PID of a program you're starting, before that program actually starts running. You could do it like this.
Start a plain script
Force the script to wait
You can probably use suspend which is a bash builitin but in the worst case you can make it stop itself with a signal
Use the PID of the bash process in every way you want
Restart the stopped bash process (SIGCONT) and do an exec - another builtin - starting your real process (it will inherit the PID)
I have a bash script that acts as the default shell for a user loging in trough ssh.
It provides a menu with several options one of wich is sending a file using netcat.
The netcat of the embedded linux I'm using lacks the -w option, so if the user closes the ssh connection without ever sending the file, the netcat command waits forever.
I need to know if the user abruptly closes the connection so the script can kill the netcat command and exit gracefully.
Things I've tried so far:
Trapping the SIGHUP: it is not issued. The only signal issued i could find is SIGCONT, but I don't think it's reliable and portable.
Playing with the -t option of the read command to detect a closed stdin: this would work if not for a silly bug in the embedded read command (only times out on the first invocation)
Edit:
I'll try to answer the questions in the comments and explain the situation further.
The code I have is:
nc -l -p 7576 > /dev/null 2>> $LOGFILE < $TMP_DIR/$BACKUP_FILE &
wait
I'm ignoring SIGINT and SIGTSTP, but I've tried to trap all the signals and the only one received is SIGCONT.
Reading the bash man page I've found out that the SIGHUP should be sent to both script and netcat and that the SIGCONT is sent to stopped jobs to ensure they receive the SIGHUP.
I guess the wait makes the script count as stopped and so it receives the SIGCONT but at the same time the wait somehow eats up the SIGHUP.
So I've tried changing the wait for a sleep and then both SIGHUP and SIGCONT are received.
The question is: why is the wait blocking the SIGHUP?
Edit 2: Solved
I solved it polling for a closed stdin with the read builtin using the -t option. To work around the bug in the read builtin I spawn it in a new bash (bash -c "read -t 3 dummy").
Does the Parent PiD change? If so you could look up the parent in the process list and make sure the process name is correct.
I have written similar applications. It would be helpful to have more of the code in your shell. I think there may be a way of writing your overall program differently which would address this issue.