How can I search an arbitrary path and determine if it has two folder names? The folder names can appear in any position in either order. Not a shell expert so seeking help here.
if [ -p "$PATH" ]; then
echo "path is set"
else
echo "path is not set"
fi
I found this segment but I'm not sure it's useful. $PATH is a special variable correct?
First, let me make sure I understand the question right. You have some path (like "/home/sam/foo/bar/baz") and you want to test whether it contains two specific directory names (e.g. "foo" and "bar") in either order, right? So, looking for "foo" and "bar":
/home/sam/foo/bar/baz would match
/mnt/bar/subdir/foo would also match
/mnt/bar/foo2 would not match, because "foo2" is not "foo"
If that's correct, you can do this in bash as two tests:
dir1="foo"
dir2="bar"
if [[ "/$path/" = *"/$dir1/"* && "/$path/" = *"/$dir2/"* ]]; then
echo "$path" contains both $dir1 and $dir2"
else
echo "$path" does not contain both $dir1 and $dir2"
fi
Notes:
This is using the [[ ]] conditional expression, which is different from [ ] and not available in basic shells. If you use this type of expression, you need to start the shell script with a shebang that tells the OS to run it with bash, not a generic shell (i.e. the first line should be either #!/bin/bash or #!/usr/bin/env bash), and do not run it with the sh command (that will override the shebang).
The way the comparison works is that it sees whether the path matches both the patterns *"/$dir1/"* and *"/$dir2/"* -- that is, it matches those names, with a slash at each end, maybe with something else (*) before and after. But since the path might not start and/or end with a slash, we add them ("/$path/") to make sure they're there.
Do not use PATH as a variable in your script -- it's a very special variable that tells the shell where to find executable commands. If you ever use it for anything else, your script will suddenly start getting "command not found" errors. Actually, there are a bunch of all-caps special-meaning variables; to avoid conflicts with them, use lowercase or mixed-case variables for your things.
In my old .bashrc, I had a short section as follows:
PATH2ADD_SCRIPTBIN="/home/foo/bar/scriptbin"
PATH2ADD_PYTHONSTUFF="/home/foo/bar/pythonprojects"
PATH2ADDLIST="$PATH2ADD_SCRIPTBIN $PATH2ADD_PYTHONSTUFF"
for PATH2ADD in $PATH2ADDLIST; do
if [ -z `echo $PATH | grep "$PATH2ADD"` ]; then
export PATH=$PATH:$PATH2ADD
echo "Added '$PATH2ADD' to the PATH."
fi
done
And in Bash, this worked just as intended: it appended the paths I included in $PATH2ADDLIST if they were not already present in the path (I had to do this after realizing how huge my path was getting each time I was sourcing my .bashrc). The output (when the provided paths were not already present) was as follows:
Added '/home/foo/bar/scriptbin' to the PATH.
Added '/home/foo/bar/pythonprojects' to the PATH.
However, I recently switched over to the magical land of Zsh, and the exact same lines of text now produce this result:
Added '/home/foo/bar/scriptbin /home/foo/bar/pythonprojects' to the PATH.
Now I'm pretty sure that this is because of some difference in how Zsh does parameter expansion, or that it has something to do with how Zsh changes the for loop, but I'm not really sure how to fix this.
Might anyone have some insight?
Use an array to store those variables, i.e.
PATH2ADD_SCRIPTBIN="/home/foo/bar/scriptbin"
PATH2ADD_PYTHONSTUFF="/home/foo/bar/pythonprojects"
# Initializing 'PATH2ADDLIST' as an array with the 2 variables
# to make the looping easier
PATH2ADDLIST=("${PATH2ADD_SCRIPTBIN}" "${PATH2ADD_PYTHONSTUFF}")
# Looping through the array contents
for PATH2ADD in "${PATH2ADDLIST[#]}"
do
# Using the exit code of 'grep' directly with a '!' negate
# condition
if ! echo "$PATH" | grep -q "$PATH2ADD"
then
export PATH=$PATH:$PATH2ADD
echo "Added '$PATH2ADD' to the PATH."
fi
done
This way it makes it more compatible in both zsh and bash. A sample dry run on both the shells,
# With interpreter set to /bin/zsh
zsh script.sh
Added '/home/foo/bar/scriptbin' to the PATH.
Added '/home/foo/bar/pythonprojects' to the PATH.
and in bash
bash script.sh
Added '/home/foo/bar/scriptbin' to the PATH.
Added '/home/foo/bar/pythonprojects' to the PATH.
zsh has a few features that make it much easier to update your path. One, there is an array parameter path that mirrors PATH: a change to either is reflected in the other. Two, that variable is declared to eliminate duplicates. You can simply write
path+=("/home/foo/bar/scriptbin" "/home/foo/bar/pythonprojects")
and each new path will be appended to path if it is not already present.
If you want more control over the order in which they are added (for example, if you want to prepend), you can use the following style:
path=( "/home/foo/bar/scriptbin"
$path
"/home/foo/bar/pythonprojects"
)
(Note that the expansion of an array parameter includes all the elements, not just the first as in bash.)
I have recently just made this script:
if test -s $HOME/koolaid.txt ; then
Billz=$(grep / $HOME/koolaid.txt)
echo $Billz
else
Billz=$HOME/notkoolaid
echo $Billz
fi
if test -d $Billz ; then
echo "Ok"
else touch $Billz
fi
So basically, if the file $HOME/koolaid.txt file does NOT exist, then Billz will be set as $HOME/koolaid.txt. It then sucesfully creates the file.
However, if I do make the koolaid.txt then I get this
mkdir: cannot create directory : No such file or directory
Any help would be appreciated
Here is a difference between content of a variable and evaluated content...
if your variable contains a string $HOME/some - you need expand it to get /home/login/same
One dangerous method is eval.
bin=$(grep / ~/.rm.cfg)
eval rbin=${bin:-$HOME/deleted}
echo "==$rbin=="
Don't eval unless you're absolutely sure what you evaling...
Here are a couple things to fix:
Start your script with a "shebang," such as:
#!/bin/sh
This way the shell will know that you want to run this as a Bourne shell script.
Also, your conditional at the top of the script doesn't handle the case well in which .rm.cfg exists but doesn't contain a slash character anywhere in it. In that case the rbin variable never gets set.
Finally, try adding the line
ls ~
at the top so you can see how the shell is interpreting the tilde character; that might be the problem.
I'm writing a quick shell script to build and execute my programs in one fell swoop.
I've gotten that part down, but I'd like to include a little if/else to catch bad extensions - if it's not an .adb (it's an Ada script), it won't let the rest of the program execute.
My two-part question is:
How do I grab just the extension? Or is it easier to just say *.adb?
What would the if/else statement look like? I have limited experience in Bash so I understand that's a pretty bad question.
Thanks!
There are ways to extract the extension, but you don't really need to:
if [[ $filename == *.adb ]] ; then
. . . # this code is run if $filename ends in .adb
else
. . . # this code is run otherwise
fi
(The trouble with extracting the extension is that you'd have to define what you mean by "extension". What is the extension of a file named foo? How about a file named report.2012.01.29? So general-purpose extension-extracting code is tricky, and not worth it if your goal is just to confirm that file has a specific extension.)
There are multiple ways to do it. Which is best depends in part on what the subsequent operations will be.
Given a variable $file, you might want to test what the extension is. In that case, you probably do best with:
extn=${file##*.}
This deletes everything up to the last dot in the name, slashes and all, leaving you with adb if the file name was adafile.adb.
If, on the other hand, you want to do different things depending on the extension, you might use:
case "$file" in
(*.adb) ...do things with .adb files;;
(*.pqr) ...do things with .pqr files;;
(*) ...cover the rest - maybe an error;;
esac
If you want the name without the extension, you can do things the more traditional way with:
base=$(basename $file .adb)
path=$(dirname $file)
The basename command gives you the last component of the file name with the extension .adb stripped off. The dirname command gives you the path leading to the last component of the file name, defaulting to . (the current directory) if there is no specified path.
The more recent way to do those last two operations is:
base=${file##/}
path=${file%/*}
The advantage of these is that they are built-in operations that do not invoke a separate executable, so they are quicker. The disadvantage of the built-ins is that if you have a name that ends with a slash, the built-in treats it as significant but the command does not (and the command is probably giving you the more desirable behaviour, unless you want to argue GIGO).
There are other techniques available too. The expr command is an old, rather heavy-weight mechanism that would not normally be used (but it is very standard). There may be other techniques using the (( ... )), $(( ... )) and [[ ... ]] operators to evaluate various sorts of expression.
To get just the extension from the file path and name, use parameter expansion:
${filename##*.} # deletes everything to the last dot
To compare it with the string adb, just do
if [[ ${filename##*.} != adb ]] ; then
echo Invalid extension at "$filename".
exit 1
fi
or, using 'else`:
if [[ ${filename##*.} != adb ]] ; then
echo Invalid extension at "$filename".
else
# Run the script...
fi
Extension:
fileext=`echo $filename | sed 's_.*\.__'`
Test
if [[ x"${fileext}" = "xadb" ]] ; then
#do something
fi
What is the purpose of a command that does nothing, being little more than a comment leader, but is actually a shell builtin in and of itself?
It's slower than inserting a comment into your scripts by about 40% per call, which probably varies greatly depending on the size of the comment. The only possible reasons I can see for it are these:
# poor man's delay function
for ((x=0;x<100000;++x)) ; do : ; done
# inserting comments into string of commands
command ; command ; : we need a comment in here for some reason ; command
# an alias for `true'
while : ; do command ; done
I guess what I'm really looking for is what historical application it might have had.
Historically, Bourne shells didn't have true and false as built-in commands. true was instead simply aliased to :, and false to something like let 0.
: is slightly better than true for portability to ancient Bourne-derived shells. As a simple example, consider having neither the ! pipeline operator nor the || list operator (as was the case for some ancient Bourne shells). This leaves the else clause of the if statement as the only means for branching based on exit status:
if command; then :; else ...; fi
Since if requires a non-empty then clause and comments don't count as non-empty, : serves as a no-op.
Nowadays (that is: in a modern context) you can usually use either : or true. Both are specified by POSIX, and some find true easier to read. However there is one interesting difference: : is a so-called POSIX special built-in, whereas true is a regular built-in.
Special built-ins are required to be built into the shell; Regular built-ins are only "typically" built in, but it isn't strictly guaranteed. There usually shouldn't be a regular program named : with the function of true in PATH of most systems.
Probably the most crucial difference is that with special built-ins, any variable set by the built-in - even in the environment during simple command evaluation - persists after the command completes, as demonstrated here using ksh93:
$ unset x; ( x=hi :; echo "$x" )
hi
$ ( x=hi true; echo "$x" )
$
Note that Zsh ignores this requirement, as does GNU Bash except when operating in POSIX compatibility mode, but all other major "POSIX sh derived" shells observe this including dash, ksh93, and mksh.
Another difference is that regular built-ins must be compatible with exec - demonstrated here using Bash:
$ ( exec : )
-bash: exec: :: not found
$ ( exec true )
$
POSIX also explicitly notes that : may be faster than true, though this is of course an implementation-specific detail.
I use it to easily enable/disable variable commands:
#!/bin/bash
if [[ "$VERBOSE" == "" || "$VERBOSE" == "0" ]]; then
vecho=":" # no "verbose echo"
else
vecho=echo # enable "verbose echo"
fi
$vecho "Verbose echo is ON"
Thus
$ ./vecho
$ VERBOSE=1 ./vecho
Verbose echo is ON
This makes for a clean script. This cannot be done with '#'.
Also,
: >afile
is one of the simplest ways to guarantee that 'afile' exists but is 0 length.
A useful application for : is if you're only interested in using parameter expansions for their side-effects rather than actually passing their result to a command.
In that case, you use the parameter expansion as an argument to either : or false depending upon whether you want an exit status of 0 or 1. An example might be
: "${var:=$1}"
Since : is a builtin, it should be pretty fast.
: can also be for block comment (similar to /* */ in C language). For example, if you want to skip a block of code in your script, you can do this:
: << 'SKIP'
your code block here
SKIP
Two more uses not mentioned in other answers:
Logging
Take this example script:
set -x
: Logging message here
example_command
The first line, set -x, makes the shell print out the command before running it. It's quite a useful construct. The downside is that the usual echo Log message type of statement now prints the message twice. The colon method gets round that. Note that you'll still have to escape special characters just like you would for echo.
Cron job titles
I've seen it being used in cron jobs, like this:
45 10 * * * : Backup for database ; /opt/backup.sh
This is a cron job that runs the script /opt/backup.sh every day at 10:45. The advantage of this technique is that it makes for better looking email subjects when the /opt/backup.sh prints some output.
It's similar to pass in Python.
One use would be to stub out a function until it gets written:
future_function () { :; }
If you'd like to truncate a file to zero bytes, useful for clearing logs, try this:
:> file.log
You could use it in conjunction with backticks (``) to execute a command without displaying its output, like this:
: `some_command`
Of course you could just do some_command > /dev/null, but the :-version is somewhat shorter.
That being said I wouldn't recommend actually doing that as it would just confuse people. It just came to mind as a possible use-case.
It's also useful for polyglot programs:
#!/usr/bin/env sh
':' //; exec "$(command -v node)" "$0" "$#"
~function(){ ... }
This is now both an executable shell-script and a JavaScript program: meaning ./filename.js, sh filename.js, and node filename.js all work.
(Definitely a little bit of a strange usage, but effective nonetheless.)
Some explication, as requested:
Shell-scripts are evaluated line-by-line; and the exec command, when run, terminates the shell and replaces it's process with the resultant command. This means that to the shell, the program looks like this:
#!/usr/bin/env sh
':' //; exec "$(command -v node)" "$0" "$#"
As long as no parameter expansion or aliasing is occurring in the word, any word in a shell-script can be wrapped in quotes without changing its' meaning; this means that ':' is equivalent to : (we've only wrapped it in quotes here to achieve the JavaScript semantics described below)
... and as described above, the first command on the first line is a no-op (it translates to : //, or if you prefer to quote the words, ':' '//'. Notice that the // carries no special meaning here, as it does in JavaScript; it's just a meaningless word that's being thrown away.)
Finally, the second command on the first line (after the semicolon), is the real meat of the program: it's the exec call which replaces the shell-script being invoked, with a Node.js process invoked to evaluate the rest of the script.
Meanwhile, the first line, in JavaScript, parses as a string-literal (':'), and then a comment, which is deleted; thus, to JavaScript, the program looks like this:
':'
~function(){ ... }
Since the string-literal is on a line by itself, it is a no-op statement, and is thus stripped from the program; that means that the entire line is removed, leaving only your program-code (in this example, the function(){ ... } body.)
Self-documenting functions
You can also use : to embed documentation in a function.
Assume you have a library script mylib.sh, providing a variety of functions. You could either source the library (. mylib.sh) and call the functions directly after that (lib_function1 arg1 arg2), or avoid cluttering your namespace and invoke the library with a function argument (mylib.sh lib_function1 arg1 arg2).
Wouldn't it be nice if you could also type mylib.sh --help and get a list of available functions and their usage, without having to manually maintain the function list in the help text?
#!/bin/bash
# all "public" functions must start with this prefix
LIB_PREFIX='lib_'
# "public" library functions
lib_function1() {
: This function does something complicated with two arguments.
:
: Parameters:
: ' arg1 - first argument ($1)'
: ' arg2 - second argument'
:
: Result:
: " it's complicated"
# actual function code starts here
}
lib_function2() {
: Function documentation
# function code here
}
# help function
--help() {
echo MyLib v0.0.1
echo
echo Usage: mylib.sh [function_name [args]]
echo
echo Available functions:
declare -f | sed -n -e '/^'$LIB_PREFIX'/,/^}$/{/\(^'$LIB_PREFIX'\)\|\(^[ \t]*:\)/{
s/^\('$LIB_PREFIX'.*\) ()/\n=== \1 ===/;s/^[ \t]*: \?['\''"]\?/ /;s/['\''"]\?;\?$//;p}}'
}
# main code
if [ "${BASH_SOURCE[0]}" = "${0}" ]; then
# the script was executed instead of sourced
# invoke requested function or display help
if [ "$(type -t - "$1" 2>/dev/null)" = function ]; then
"$#"
else
--help
fi
fi
A few comments about the code:
All "public" functions have the same prefix. Only these are meant to be invoked by the user, and to be listed in the help text.
The self-documenting feature relies on the previous point, and uses declare -f to enumerate all available functions, then filters them through sed to only display functions with the appropriate prefix.
It is a good idea to enclose the documentation in single quotes, to prevent undesired expansion and whitespace removal. You'll also need to be careful when using apostrophes/quotes in the text.
You could write code to internalize the library prefix, i.e. the user only has to type mylib.sh function1 and it gets translated internally to lib_function1. This is an exercise left to the reader.
The help function is named "--help". This is a convenient (i.e. lazy) approach that uses the library invoke mechanism to display the help itself, without having to code an extra check for $1. At the same time, it will clutter your namespace if you source the library. If you don't like that, you can either change the name to something like lib_help or actually check the args for --help in the main code and invoke the help function manually.
I saw this usage in a script and thought it was a good substitute for invoking basename within a script.
oldIFS=$IFS
IFS=/
for basetool in $0 ; do : ; done
IFS=$oldIFS
...
this is a replacement for the code: basetool=$(basename $0)
Another way, not yet mentioned here is the initialisation of parameters in infinite while-loops. Below is not the cleanest example, but it serves it's purpose.
#!/usr/bin/env bash
[ "$1" ] && foo=0 && bar="baz"
while : "${foo=2}" "${bar:=qux}"; do
echo "$foo"
(( foo == 3 )) && echo "$bar" && break
(( foo=foo+1 ))
done