I get it!

   cat x | grep y

is redundant. did I learn that when it wasn't redundant? if it never has been redundant I wonder why I thought the pipe was needed?

:-)~MIKE~(-:


On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Brian Cluff <brian@snaptek.com> wrote:
You'll need to add some single quotes to keep the shell from interpreting your regex as shell code like this:

grep -E 'error|fail' {make,install,check}.fail

Without the single quotes you are telling the system to cat from your set of files and look for lines with the word error and pipe that to a program called fail.

I found that I did have to add the -E even thought the man page says that in the GNU version of grep the basic and extended regular expressions are the same... it appears that is not the case in practice.

Brian Cluff


On 08/25/2014 12:56 PM, Michael Havens wrote:
I have 3 files, make.fail, install.fail, and check.fail. I want to check
for two words in those files: error and fail.

would this work?

cat {make,install,check}.fail | grep -i error|fail

I was told to put the 'E' option in to grep. Looking at the man page it
seems that the E option is only useful if I were greping for something
that begins with a '{'. AM I misreading the man page?

man quote:
        GNU grep -E attempts to support traditional usage by assuming
that { is
        not   special  if  it  would  be  the  start  of  an  invalid
interval
        specification.  For example, the command grep -E '{1' searches
for  the
        two-character  string  {1  instead  of  reporting a syntax error
in the
        regular expression.  POSIX allows this behavior as  an
extension,  but
        portable scripts should avoid it.



:-)~MIKE~(-:


On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Michael Havens <bmike1@gmail.com
<mailto:bmike1@gmail.com>> wrote:

    you guys are so helpful! Thanks.

    :-)~MIKE~(-:


    On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Jon Kettenhofen <subs@kexsof.com
    <mailto:subs@kexsof.com>> wrote:

        I like visible proofs, so here's a test I ran:
        (terminal output was as is shown)

        [jon@localhost ~]$ rm temp
        [jon@localhost ~]$ echo >>temp
        [jon@localhost ~]$ echo $?
        0
        [jon@localhost ~]$ cat temp

        [jon@localhost ~]$ echo >>temp 2>&1
        [jon@localhost ~]$ echo $?
        0
        [jon@localhost ~]$ cat temp


        [jon@localhost ~]$

        as you can see, no errors and the single ">" did not erase the
        file when used in this manner.  So Mike's script should work as
        intended
        at least if there is no stderr output.

        but suppose there was an error? (apologizing for the length of ...)

        [jon@localhost ~]$ echo "echo" >test
        [jon@localhost ~]$ echo "ls temp2" >>test
        [jon@localhost ~]$ # test ls of non-existent file
        [jon@localhost ~]$ ls temp2
        ls: cannot access temp2: No such file or directory
        [jon@localhost ~]$ echo $?
        2
        [jon@localhost ~]$ # see, we get both an error and stderr message
        [jon@localhost ~]$ # so
        [jon@localhost ~]$ mv test test.sh
        [jon@localhost ~]$ chgmod +x test.sh
        bash: chgmod: command not found...
        [jon@localhost ~]$ chmod +x test.sh
        [jon@localhost ~]$ # i'm not perfect!
        [jon@localhost ~]$ rm temp
        [jon@localhost ~]$ ./test.sh >>temp
        ls: cannot access temp2: No such file or directory
        [jon@localhost ~]$ echo $?
        2
        [jon@localhost ~]$ cat temp

        [jon@localhost ~]$ ./test.sh >>temp 2>&1
        [jon@localhost ~]$ echo $?
        2
        [jon@localhost ~]$ cat temp


        ls: cannot access temp2: No such file or directory
        [jon@localhost ~]$

        as you can see, Mike's script will work as he apparently intended,
        providing he's using a modern version of bash.



        On 08/24/2014 09:56 PM, James Mcphee wrote:

            you've said make, append stdout (default file descriptor 1)
            to file
            make.fail, assign stderr (default filedescriptor 2) the same
            filedescriptor as stdout.  So...  If the intent was to have
            both stderr
            and stdout append make.fail, then it is correct.


            On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Michael Havens
            <bmike1@gmail.com <mailto:bmike1@gmail.com>
            <mailto:bmike1@gmail.com <mailto:bmike1@gmail.com>>> wrote:

                 what I really need to know is will this:

                     make>>make.fail 2>&1

                 send stderr and stdout to the file 'make.fail' or did I
            write it
                 incorrectly?

                 :-)~MIKE~(-:


                 On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Brian Cluff
            <brian@snaptek.com <mailto:brian@snaptek.com>
                 <mailto:brian@snaptek.com <mailto:brian@snaptek.com>>>

            wrote:

                     the > will delete any file that it points at even
            if the command
                     doesn't actually output anything.  It will even
            delete the file
                     is the command doesn't exist like if you type grep
            as gerp
                      >file, file will still be created/overwritten.

                     If you want to make sure that your command doesn't
            overwrite any
                     existing files you have to set the noclobber option
            like:
                     $ set -o noclobber

                     A good trick to know:
                     You can use the > to delete the contents of a file
            without
                     having to delete and recreate the file by simply
            doing this:
                     $ >yourfile

                     Brian Cluff


                     On 08/24/2014 02:36 PM, Michael Havens wrote:

                         I have a question about redirections:

                              make>>make.fail 2>&1

                         tells it make and then to send (>) stderr (2)
            to stdout (1)
                         and also to
                         send stdout that way also (&1). finally all of
            that gets
                         sent to a file
                         named make.fail (>>). Isn't '>>' actually
            'append' whereas
                         '>' would
                         work just as well so long as the file didn't
            already exist?
                         If the file
                         did exist would I get an error or would the
            file be overwritten?
                         :-)~MIKE~(-:



            ------------------------------____---------------------
                         PLUG-discuss mailing list -
                         PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.____org
                         <mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.__phxlinux.org

            <mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>>

                         To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your
            mail settings:
            http://lists.phxlinux.org/____mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
            <http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss>

            <http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
            <http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss>>

                     ------------------------------____---------------------
                     PLUG-discuss mailing list -
            PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.____org
                     <mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.__phxlinux.org

            <mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>>

                     To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail
            settings:
            http://lists.phxlinux.org/____mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
            <http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss>



            <http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
            <http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss>>



                 ------------------------------__---------------------
                 PLUG-discuss mailing list -
            PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
            <mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>
                 <mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.__phxlinux.org

            <mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>>

                 To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
            http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
            <http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss>




            --
            James McPhee
            jmcphe@gmail.com <mailto:jmcphe@gmail.com>
            <mailto:jmcphe@gmail.com <mailto:jmcphe@gmail.com>>




            ------------------------------__---------------------
            PLUG-discuss mailing list -
            PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
            <mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>
            To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
            http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
            <http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss>


        ------------------------------__---------------------
        PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.__org
        <mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org>
        To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
        http://lists.phxlinux.org/__mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
        <http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss>





---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.phxlinux.org
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss