I'm using Ruby on Linux.
I'd like to test for the existence of a command on the Linux system.
I'd like to not get back the output of the command that I'm testing for.
I'd also like to not get back any output that results from the shell being unable to find the command.
I want to avoid using shell redirection from within the command that I send to the shell. So something like system("foo > /dev/null") would be unsuitable.
I'm ok with using redirection if there is a way to do it from Ruby.
The simplest thing would be just to use system. Let's say you're looking for ls.
irb(main):005:0> system("which ls")
/bin/ls
=> true
If that's off the table, you could peek into the directories in ENV["PATH"] for the executable you're looking for. ENV["PATH"].split(":") would give you an array of directory names to check for the desired command. If you find a file with the right name, you may want to ensure it's an executable.
I want to avoid using shell redirection from within the command that I
send to the shell. So something like system("foo > /dev/null") would
be unsuitable. I'm ok with using redirection if there is a way to do it from Ruby.
system("exec which cmd", out: "/dev/null")
puts "Command is available." if ($?).success?
The exec is to explicitly avoid unnecessary forking in the shell.
As a sidenote type -P can be used instead of which, but it relies on Bash and may have surprising effects if script is ported to an environment with a different default shell.
Related
In cmd, it is possible to use Linux commands with the ubuntu or bash commands, but they are very fickle. In batch, it is also possible to make a VBScript-batch hybrid, which got me thinking, is it possible to make a Bash-batch hybrid? Besides being a tongue-twister, I feel that Bash-batch scripts may be really useful.
What I have tried so far
So far I tried using the empty bash and ubuntu commands alone since they switch the normal command-prompt to the Ubuntu/Bash shell, but even if you put commands after the ubuntu/bash they wouldn't show or do anything.
After I tried that, I tried using the ubuntu -run command, but like I said earlier, it’s really fickle and inconsistent on what things work and what things don't. It is less inconsistent when you pipe things into it, but it still usually doesn't work.
I looked here since it seemed like it would answer my question and I tried it, but it didn't work since it required another program (I think).
I also looked to this and I guess it failed miserably, but interesting concept.
What I've gotten from all of my research is that most people think when this is mentioned of a file that could be run either as a .bat file or as .sh shell file instead of my goal, to make a file that runs both batch and Bash commands in the same instance.
What I want this for relates to my other question where I am trying to hash a string instead of a file in cmd, and you could do it with a Bash command, but I would still like to keep the file as a batch file.
Sure you can use Bash in batch, assuming it is available. Just use the command bash -c 'cmd', where cmd is the command that you want to run in Bash.
The following batch line pipes the Hello to cat -A command that prints it including the invisible symbols:
echo Hello | bash -c "cat -A"
Compare the output with the result of the version completely written in Bash:
bash -c "echo Hello | cat -A"
They will slightly differ!
I'm working on an interactive Ruby script, which build and packages resources. In the middle of the process, I'd like to drop into an interactive shell, but pre-cd'd into a specific working directory, as well as with an explanatory message (CTRL-D to continue). The interactive bash + given initial command is what's problematic.
Per the answer for doing something like this in Bash, given at https://stackoverflow.com/a/36152028, I've tried
system '/bin/bash', '--init-file', '<(echo "cd ~/src/devops; pwd")'
However, bash runs interactively but completely ignores the '<(echo "cd ~/src/devops; pwd")' section.
Interestingly system '/bin/bash', '--init-file complains if no argument is given, but literally anything runs bash, but with no initial command.
*Note that (--rcfile instead of --init-file) has the same effect.
Change the working directory of the Ruby script first, so that bash inherits the correct working directory.
curr_dir = Dir.pwd
Dir.chdir("#{Dir.home}/src/devops")
system "/bin/bash"
Dir.chdir(curr_dir) # Restore the original working directory if desired
Oh, this is probably far better (you can probably guess how little familiarity I have with Ruby):
system("/bin/bash", :chdir=>"#{Dir.home}/src/devops")
I'm trying this in ruby.
I have a shell script to which I can pass a command which will be executed by the shell after some initial environment variables have been set. So in ruby code I'm doing this..
# ruby code
my_results = `some_script -allow username -cmd "perform_action"`
The issue is that since the script "some_script" runs "perform_action" in it's own environment, I'm not seeing the result when i output the variable "my_results". So a ruby puts of "my_results" just gives me some initial comments before the script processes the command "perform_action".
Any clues how I can get the output of perform_action into "my_results"?
Thanks.
The backticks will only capture stdout. If you are redirecting stdout, or writing to any other handle (like stderr), it will not show up in its output; otherwise, it should. Whether something goes into stdout or not is not dependent on an environment, only on redirection or direct writing to a different handle.
Try to see whether your script actually prints to stdout from shell:
$ some_script -allow username -cmd "perform_action" > just_stdout.log
$ cat just_stdout.log
In any case, this is not a Ruby question. (Or at least it isn't if I understood you correctly.) You would get the same answer for any language.
I wrote a script that's retrieving the currently run command using $BASH_COMMAND. The script is basically doing some logic to figure out current command and file being opened for each tmux session. Everything works great, except when user runs a piped command (i.e. cat file | less), in which case $BASH_COMMAND only seems to store the first command before the pipe. As a result, instead of showing the command as less[file] (which is the actual program that has the file open), the script outputs it as cat[file].
One alternative I tried using is relying on history 1 instead of $BASH_COMMAND. There are a couple issues with this alternative as well. First, it does not auto-expand aliases, like $BASH_COMMAND does, which in some cases could cause the script to get confused (for example, if I tell it to ignore ls, but use ll instead (mapped to ls -l), the script will not ignore the command, processing it anyway), and including extra conditionals for each alias doesn't seem like a clean solution. The second problem is that I'm using HISTIGNORE to filter out some common commands, which I still want the script to be aware of, using history will just make the script ignore the last command unless it's tracked by history.
I also tried using ${#PIPESTATUS[#]} to see if the array length is 1 (no pipes) or higher (pipes used, in which case I would retrieve the history instead), but it seems to always only be aware of 1 command as well.
Is anyone aware of other alternatives that could work for me (such as another variable that would store $BASH_COMMAND for the other subcalls that are to be executed after the current subcall is complete, or some way to be aware if the pipe was used in the last command)?
i think that you will need to change a bit your implementation and use "history" command to get it to work. Also, use the command "alias" to check all of the configured alias.. the command "which" to check if the command is actually stored in any PATH dir. good luck
Bash commands are available from an interactive tclsh session. E.g. in a tclsh session you can have
% ls
instead of
$ exec ls
However, you cant have a tcl script which calls bash commands directly (i.e. without exec).
How can I make tclsh to recognize bash commands while interpreting tcl script files, just like it does in an interactive session?
I guess there is some tcl package (or something like that), which is being loaded automatically while launching an interactive session to support direct calls of bash commans. How can I load it manually in tcl script files?
If you want to have specific utilities available in your scripts, write bridging procedures:
proc ls args {
exec {*}[auto_execok ls] {*}$args
}
That will even work (with obvious adaptation) for most shell builtins or on Windows. (To be fair, you usually don't want to use an external ls; the internal glob command usually suffices, sometimes with extra help from some file subcommands.) Some commands need a little more work (e.g., redirecting input so it comes from the terminal, with an extra <#stdin or </dev/tty; that's needed for stty on some platforms) but that works reasonably well.
However, if what you're asking for is to have arbitrary execution of external programs without any extra code to mark that they are external, that's considered to be against the ethos of Tcl. The issue is that it makes the code quite a lot harder to maintain; it's not obvious that you're doing an expensive call-out instead of using something (relatively) cheap that's internal. Putting in the exec in that case isn't that onerous…
What's going on here is that the unknown proc is getting invoked when you type a command like ls, because that's not an existing tcl command, and by default, that command will check that if the command was invoked from an interactive session and from the top-level (not indirectly in a proc body) and it's checking to see if the proc name exists somewhere on the path. You can get something like this by writing your own proc unknown.
For a good start on this, examine the output of
info body unknown
One thing you should know is that ls is not a Bash command. It's a standalone utility. The clue for how tclsh runs such utilities is right there in its name - sh means "shell". So it's the rough equivalent to Bash in that Bash is also a shell. Tcl != tclsh so you have to use exec.