Say I have a program foo, which prints a gazillion lines to the console.
How do I run it in the background, while piping its output to a file?
I tried this
./foo | output.txt&
Doesn't seem to work
Take a look at the nohup utility, it allows to detach a command from the tty:
nohup sh -c "./foo 2>&1 > output.txt" &
Piping the output of a command to a file actually does not work, you can only redirect it: that is the > output.txt. Piping makes sense if what follows is a command again which accepts input from its standard input, but not for a passive file. The additional 2>&1 redirects the commands standard error output into the standard output, so that you have only one single output pipe, otherwise potential errors would still spill out to the controlling tty. The actual command here is a shell invoked, that is because piping will break the sequence otherwise.
I've got a script on my computer named test.py. What I've been doing so far to run the program is type python test.py into the terminal.
Is there a command on Unix operating systems that doesn't require the user to specify the program he/she uses to run the script but that will instead run the script using whichever program the shebang line is pointing to?
For example, I'm looking for a command that would let me type some_command test.txtinto the terminal, and if the first line of test.txt is #!/usr/bin/python, the script would be interpreted as a python script, but if the first line is #!/path/to/javascript/interpreter, the the script would be interpreted as javascript.
This is the default behavior of the terminal (or just executing a file in general) all you have to do is make the script executable with
chmod u+x test.txt
Then (assuming text.txt is in your current directory) every time you type
./text.txt
It will look at the sh-bang line and use the program there to run text.txt.
If you really want to duplicate built-in functionality, try this.
#!/bin/sh
x=$1
shift
p=$(sed -n 's/^#!//p;q' "$x" | grep .) && exec $p "$#"
exec "$x" "$#"
echo "$0: $x: No can do" >&2
Maybe call it start to remind you of the similarly useful Windows command.
What is the difference between
cat dat | tee >(wc -l ) | some other command
and
cat dat | tee file | wc -l
in terms of what is happening under the hood?
I can understand the second one as tee is forking the stream into a file and also to a pipe. But I am confused with the first one.
The first notation is the process substitution of Bash 4.x (not in 3.x, or not all versions of 3.x).
As far as tee is concerned, it is given a file name (such as /dev/fd/64) to which it writes as well as to standard output; it is actually a file descriptor for the write end of a pipe. As far as wc is concerned, it reads its standard input (which is the read end of the pipe that is connected to /dev/fd/64 for tee), and writes its answer to the standard output of the shell invoking the pipeline (not the standard output of tee which goes down the pipeline).
Since >( is process substitiution of bash,
the first line says:
send the contents of file 'dat' into some other command
while process 'wc' is run with its input or output
connected to a pipe which also sends the content of 'dat'
check "Process Substitution" of bash manpage.
I have a problem with the nohup command.
When I run my job, I have a lot of data. The output nohup.out becomes too large and my process slows down. How can I run this command without getting nohup.out?
The nohup command only writes to nohup.out if the output would otherwise go to the terminal. If you have redirected the output of the command somewhere else - including /dev/null - that's where it goes instead.
nohup command >/dev/null 2>&1 # doesn't create nohup.out
Note that the >/dev/null 2>&1 sequence can be abbreviated to just >&/dev/null in most (but not all) shells.
If you're using nohup, that probably means you want to run the command in the background by putting another & on the end of the whole thing:
nohup command >/dev/null 2>&1 & # runs in background, still doesn't create nohup.out
On Linux, running a job with nohup automatically closes its input as well. On other systems, notably BSD and macOS, that is not the case, so when running in the background, you might want to close input manually. While closing input has no effect on the creation or not of nohup.out, it avoids another problem: if a background process tries to read anything from standard input, it will pause, waiting for you to bring it back to the foreground and type something. So the extra-safe version looks like this:
nohup command </dev/null >/dev/null 2>&1 & # completely detached from terminal
Note, however, that this does not prevent the command from accessing the terminal directly, nor does it remove it from your shell's process group. If you want to do the latter, and you are running bash, ksh, or zsh, you can do so by running disown with no argument as the next command. That will mean the background process is no longer associated with a shell "job" and will not have any signals forwarded to it from the shell. (A disowned process gets no signals forwarded to it automatically by its parent shell - but without nohup, it will still receive a HUP signal sent via other means, such as a manual kill command. A nohup'ed process ignores any and all HUP signals, no matter how they are sent.)
Explanation:
In Unixy systems, every source of input or target of output has a number associated with it called a "file descriptor", or "fd" for short. Every running program ("process") has its own set of these, and when a new process starts up it has three of them already open: "standard input", which is fd 0, is open for the process to read from, while "standard output" (fd 1) and "standard error" (fd 2) are open for it to write to. If you just run a command in a terminal window, then by default, anything you type goes to its standard input, while both its standard output and standard error get sent to that window.
But you can ask the shell to change where any or all of those file descriptors point before launching the command; that's what the redirection (<, <<, >, >>) and pipe (|) operators do.
The pipe is the simplest of these... command1 | command2 arranges for the standard output of command1 to feed directly into the standard input of command2. This is a very handy arrangement that has led to a particular design pattern in UNIX tools (and explains the existence of standard error, which allows a program to send messages to the user even though its output is going into the next program in the pipeline). But you can only pipe standard output to standard input; you can't send any other file descriptors to a pipe without some juggling.
The redirection operators are friendlier in that they let you specify which file descriptor to redirect. So 0<infile reads standard input from the file named infile, while 2>>logfile appends standard error to the end of the file named logfile. If you don't specify a number, then input redirection defaults to fd 0 (< is the same as 0<), while output redirection defaults to fd 1 (> is the same as 1>).
Also, you can combine file descriptors together: 2>&1 means "send standard error wherever standard output is going". That means that you get a single stream of output that includes both standard out and standard error intermixed with no way to separate them anymore, but it also means that you can include standard error in a pipe.
So the sequence >/dev/null 2>&1 means "send standard output to /dev/null" (which is a special device that just throws away whatever you write to it) "and then send standard error to wherever standard output is going" (which we just made sure was /dev/null). Basically, "throw away whatever this command writes to either file descriptor".
When nohup detects that neither its standard error nor output is attached to a terminal, it doesn't bother to create nohup.out, but assumes that the output is already redirected where the user wants it to go.
The /dev/null device works for input, too; if you run a command with </dev/null, then any attempt by that command to read from standard input will instantly encounter end-of-file. Note that the merge syntax won't have the same effect here; it only works to point a file descriptor to another one that's open in the same direction (input or output). The shell will let you do >/dev/null <&1, but that winds up creating a process with an input file descriptor open on an output stream, so instead of just hitting end-of-file, any read attempt will trigger a fatal "invalid file descriptor" error.
nohup some_command > /dev/null 2>&1&
That's all you need to do!
Have you tried redirecting all three I/O streams:
nohup ./yourprogram > foo.out 2> foo.err < /dev/null &
You might want to use the detach program. You use it like nohup but it doesn't produce an output log unless you tell it to. Here is the man page:
NAME
detach - run a command after detaching from the terminal
SYNOPSIS
detach [options] [--] command [args]
Forks a new process, detaches is from the terminal, and executes com‐
mand with the specified arguments.
OPTIONS
detach recognizes a couple of options, which are discussed below. The
special option -- is used to signal that the rest of the arguments are
the command and args to be passed to it.
-e file
Connect file to the standard error of the command.
-f Run in the foreground (do not fork).
-i file
Connect file to the standard input of the command.
-o file
Connect file to the standard output of the command.
-p file
Write the pid of the detached process to file.
EXAMPLE
detach xterm
Start an xterm that will not be closed when the current shell exits.
AUTHOR
detach was written by Robbert Haarman. See http://inglorion.net/ for
contact information.
Note I have no affiliation with the author of the program. I'm only a satisfied user of the program.
Following command will let you run something in the background without getting nohup.out:
nohup command |tee &
In this way, you will be able to get console output while running script on the remote server:
sudo bash -c "nohup /opt/viptel/viptel_bin/log.sh $* &> /dev/null" &
Redirecting the output of sudo causes sudo to reask for the password, thus an awkward mechanism is needed to do this variant.
If you have a BASH shell on your mac/linux in-front of you, you try out the below steps to understand the redirection practically :
Create a 2 line script called zz.sh
#!/bin/bash
echo "Hello. This is a proper command"
junk_errorcommand
The echo command's output goes into STDOUT filestream (file descriptor 1).
The error command's output goes into STDERR filestream (file descriptor 2)
Currently, simply executing the script sends both STDOUT and STDERR to the screen.
./zz.sh
Now start with the standard redirection :
zz.sh > zfile.txt
In the above, "echo" (STDOUT) goes into the zfile.txt. Whereas "error" (STDERR) is displayed on the screen.
The above is the same as :
zz.sh 1> zfile.txt
Now you can try the opposite, and redirect "error" STDERR into the file. The STDOUT from "echo" command goes to the screen.
zz.sh 2> zfile.txt
Combining the above two, you get:
zz.sh 1> zfile.txt 2>&1
Explanation:
FIRST, send STDOUT 1 to zfile.txt
THEN, send STDERR 2 to STDOUT 1 itself (by using &1 pointer).
Therefore, both 1 and 2 goes into the same file (zfile.txt)
Eventually, you can pack the whole thing inside nohup command & to run it in the background:
nohup zz.sh 1> zfile.txt 2>&1&
You can run the below command.
nohup <your command> & > <outputfile> 2>&1 &
e.g.
I have a nohup command inside script
./Runjob.sh > sparkConcuurent.out 2>&1
There are many things that all programmers should know, but I am particularly interested in the Unix/Linux commands that we should all know. For accomplishing tasks that we may come up against at some point such as refactoring, reporting, network updates etc.
The reason I am curious is because having previously worked as a software tester at a software company while I am studying my degree, I noticed that all of developers (who were developing Windows software) had 2 computers.
To their left was their Windows XP development machine, and to the right was a Linux box. I think it was Ubuntu. Anyway they told me that they used it because it provided powerful unix operations that Windows couldn't do in their development process.
This makes me curious to know, as a software engineer what do you believe are some of the most powerful scripts/commands/uses that you can perform on a Unix/Linux operating system that every programmer should know for solving real world tasks that may not necessarily relate to writing code?
We all know what sed, awk and grep do. I am interested in some actual Unix/Linux scripting pieces that have solved a difficult problem for you, so that other programmers may benefit. Please provide your story and source.
I am sure there are numerous examples like this that people keep in their 'Scripts' folder.
Update: People seem to be misinterpreting the question. I am not asking for the names of individual unix commands, rather UNIX code snippets that have solved a problem for you.
Best answers from the Community
Traverse a directory tree and print out paths to any files that match a regular expression:
find . -exec grep -l -e 'myregex' {} \; >> outfile.txt
Invoke the default editor(Nano/ViM)
(works on most Unix systems including Mac OS X)
Default editor is whatever your
"EDITOR" environment variable is
set to. ie: export
EDITOR=/usr/bin/pico which is
located at ~/.profile under Mac OS
X.
Ctrl+x Ctrl+e
List all running network connections (including which app they belong to)
lsof -i -nP
Clear the Terminal's search history (Another of my favourites)
history -c
I find commandlinefu.com to be an excellent resource for various shell scripting recipes.
Examples
Common
# Run the last command as root
sudo !!
# Rapidly invoke an editor to write a long, complex, or tricky command
ctrl-x ctrl-e
# Execute a command at a given time
echo "ls -l" | at midnight
Esoteric
# output your microphone to a remote computer's speaker
dd if=/dev/dsp | ssh -c arcfour -C username#host dd of=/dev/dsp
How to exit VI
:wq
Saves the file and ends the misery.
Alternative of ":wq" is ":x" to save and close the vi editor.
grep
awk
sed
perl
find
A lot of Unix power comes from its ability to manipulate text files and filter data. Of course, you can get all of these commands for Windows. They are just not native in the OS, like they are in Unix.
and the ability to chain commands together with pipes etc. This can create extremely powerful single lines of commands from simple functions.
Your shell is the most powerful tool you have available
being able to write simple loops etc
understanding file globbing (e.g. *.java etc.)
being able to put together commands via pipes, subshells. redirection etc.
Having that level of shell knowledge allows you to do enormous amounts on the command line, without having to record info via temporary text files, copy/paste etc., and to leverage off the huge number of utility programs that permit slicing/dicing of data.
Unix Power Tools will show you so much of this. Every time I open my copy I find something new.
I use this so much I am actually ashamed of myself. Remove spaces from all filenames and replace them with an underscore:
[removespaces.sh]
#!/bin/bash
find . -type f -name "* *" | while read file
do
mv "$file" "${file// /_}"
done
My personal favorite is the lsof command.
"lsof" can be used to list opened file descriptors, sockets, and pipes.
I find it extremely useful when trying to figure out which processes have used which ports/files on my machine.
Example: List all internet connections without hostname resolution and without port to port name conversion.
lsof -i -nP
http://www.manpagez.com/man/8/lsof/
If you make a typo in a long command, you can rerun the command with a substitution (in bash):
mkdir ~/aewseomeDirectory
you can see that "awesome" is mispelled, you can type the following to re run the command with the typo corrected
^aew^awe
it then outputs what it substituted (mkdir ~/aweseomeDirectory) and runs the command. (don't forget to undo the damage you did with the incorrect command!)
The tr command is the most under-appreciated command in Unix:
#Convert all input to upper case
ls | tr a-z A-Z
#take the output and put into a single line
ls | tr "\n" " "
#get rid of all numbers
ls -lt | tr -d 0-9
When solving problems on faulty linux boxes, by far the most common key sequence I type end up typing is alt+sysrq R E I S U B
The power of this tools (grep find, awk, sed) comes from their versatility, so giving a particular case seems quite useless.
man is the most powerful comand, because then you can understand what you type instead of just blindly copy pasting from stack overflow.
Example are welcome, but there are already topics for tis.
My most used :
grep something_to_find * -R
which can be replaced by ack and
find | xargs
find with results piped into xargs can be very powerful
some of you might disagree with me, but nevertheless, here's something to talk about. If one learns gawk ( other variants as well) throughly, one can skip learning and using grep/sed/wc/cut/paste and a few other *nix tools. all you need is one good tool to do the job of many combined.
Some way to search (multiple) badly formatted log files, in which the search string may be found on an "orphaned" next line. For example, to display both the 1st, and a concatenated 3rd and 4th line when searching for id = 110375:
[2008-11-08 07:07:01] [INFO] ...; id = 110375; ...
[2008-11-08 07:07:02] [INFO] ...; id = 238998; ...
[2008-11-08 07:07:03] [ERROR] ... caught exception
...; id = 110375; ...
[2008-11-08 07:07:05] [INFO] ...; id = 800612; ...
I guess there must be better solutions (yes, add them...!) than the following concatenation of the two lines using sed prior to actually running grep:
#!/bin/bash
if [ $# -ne 1 ]
then
echo "Usage: `basename $0` id"
echo "Searches all myproject's logs for the given id"
exit -1
fi
# When finding "caught exception" then append the next line into the pattern
# space bij using "N", and next replace the newline with a colon and a space
# to ensure a single line starting with a timestamp, to allow for sorting
# the output of multiple files:
ls -rt /var/www/rails/myproject/shared/log/production.* \
| xargs cat | sed '/caught exception$/N;s/\n/: /g' \
| grep "id = $1" | sort
...to yield:
[2008-11-08 07:07:01] [INFO] ...; id = 110375; ...
[2008-11-08 07:07:03] [ERROR] ... caught exception: ...; id = 110375; ...
Actually, a more generic solution would append all (possibly multiple) lines that do not start with some [timestamp] to its previous line. Anyone? Not necessarily using sed, of course.
for card in `seq 1 8` ;do
for ts in `seq 1 31` ; do
echo $card $ts >>/etc/tuni.cfg;
done
done
was better than writing the silly 248 lines of config by hand.
Neded to drop some leftover tables that all were prefixed with 'tmp'
for table in `echo show tables | mysql quotiadb |grep ^tmp` ; do
echo drop table $table
done
Review the output, rerun the loop and pipe it to mysql
Finding PIDs without the grep itself showing up
export CUPSPID=`ps -ef | grep cups | grep -v grep | awk '{print $2;}'`
Best answers from the Community
Traverse a directory tree and print out paths to any files that match a regular expression:
find . -exec grep -l -e 'myregex' {} \; >> outfile.txt
Invoke the default editor(Nano/ViM)
(works on most Unix systems including Mac OS X)
Default editor is whatever your
"EDITOR" environment variable is
set to. ie: export
EDITOR=/usr/bin/pico which is
located at ~/.profile under Mac OS
X.
Ctrl+x Ctrl+e
List all running network connections (including which app they belong to)
lsof -i -nP
Clear the Terminal's search history (Another of my favourites)
history -c
Repeat your previous command in bash using !!. I oftentimes run chown otheruser: -R /home/otheruser and forget to use sudo. If you forget sudo, using !! is a little easier than arrow-up and then home.
sudo !!
I'm also not a fan of automatically resolved hostnames and names for ports, so I keep an alias for iptables mapped to iptables -nL --line-numbers. I'm not even sure why the line numbers are hidden by default.
Finally, if you want to check if a process is listening on a port as it should, bound to the right address you can run
netstat -nlp
Then you can grep the process name or port number (-n gives you numeric).
I also love to have the aid of colors in the terminal. I like to add this to my bashrc to remind me whether I'm root without even having to read it. This actually helped me a lot, I never forget sudo anymore.
red='\033[1;31m'
green='\033[1;32m'
none='\033[0m'
if [ $(id -u) -eq 0 ];
then
PS1="[\[$red\]\u\[$none\]#\H \w]$ "
else
PS1="[\[$green\]\u\[$none\]#\H \w]$ "
fi
Those are all very simple commands, but I use them a lot. Most of them even deserved an alias on my machines.
Grep (try Windows Grep)
sed (try Sed for Windows)
In fact, there's a great set of ports of really useful *nix commands available at http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/. If you have a *nix background and now use windows, you should probably check them out.
You would be better of if you keep a cheatsheet with you... there is no single command that can be termed most useful. If a perticular command does your job its useful and powerful
Edit you want powerful shell scripts? shell scripts are programs. Get the basics right, build on individual commands and youll get what is called a powerful script. The one that serves your need is powerful otherwise its useless. It would have been better had you mentioned a problem and asked how to solve it.
Sort of an aside, but you can get powershell on windows. Its really powerful and can do a lot of the *nix type stuff. One cool difference is that you work with .net objects instead of text which can be useful if you're using the pipeline for filtering etc.
Alternatively, if you don't need the .NET integration, install Cygwin on the Windows box. (And add its directory to the Windows PATH.)
The fact you can use -name and -iname multiple times in a find command was an eye opener to me.
[findplaysong.sh]
#!/bin/bash
cd ~
echo Matched...
find /home/musicuser/Music/ -type f -iname "*$1*" -iname "*$2*" -exec echo {} \;
echo Sleeping 5 seconds
sleep 5
find /home/musicuser/Music/ -type f -iname "*$1*" -iname "*$2*" -exec mplayer {} \;
exit
When things work on one server but are broken on another the following lets you compare all the related libraries:
export MYLIST=`ldd amule | awk ' { print $3; }'`; for a in $MYLIST; do cksum $a; done
Compare this list with the one between the machines and you can isolate differences quickly.
To run in parallel several processes without overloading too much the machine (in a multiprocessor architecture):
NP=`cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep processor | wc -l`
#your loop here
if [ `jobs | wc -l` -gt $NP ];
then
wait
fi
launch_your_task_in_background&
#finish your loop here
Start all WebService(s)
find -iname '*weservice*'|xargs -I {} service {} restart
Search a local class in java subdirectory
find -iname '*.java'|xargs grep 'class Pool'
Find all items from file recursivly in subdirectories of current path:
cat searches.txt| xargs -I {} -d, -n 1 grep -r {}
P.S searches.txt: first,second,third, ... ,million
:() { :|: &} ;:
Fork Bomb without root access.
Try it on your own risk.
You can do anything with this...
gcc