When I try to run a shell command in ipython or the julia repl it just says
shell> ls
zsh:1: command not found: ls
Not sure if it matters, but I have my path set in zshenv instead of zshrc so that emacs shell works.
Any ideas?
Edit:
I'm on macOS 10.14.6
For Julia, The shell> REPL prompt does in fact use a shell to execute its commands (on non-Windows systems). It effectively does something like run(`$shell -c ls`), and for most shells (including zsh) this means "non-interactive" mode and limits the number of init files that get loaded. You want to make sure your shell is working in this mode; I'd guess that if you type zsh -c ls at your terminal it'll be similarly broken.
Alternatively, you can customize which shell Julia uses through an environment variable. Setting JULIA_SHELL=/bin/sh is probably a safe bet — Julia uses that environment variable if it is set, otherwise it uses SHELL, and finally it falls back to /bin/sh if neither is set.
I'm not as familiar with ipython, but I'd wager it's doing something similar.
Related
When using bash, if I have an environment variable called SOMEPATH which contains a path (e.g. SOMEPATH=/usr/local/lib), then if I type
ls $SOMEPATH/
and hit tab then bash expands the environment variable so my command line now says
ls /usr/local/lib/
If I do the same thing in zsh it instead escapes the $ sign so after tab completion the command line looks like
ls \$SOMEPATH
How can I get zsh to behave like bash does in this regard?
I've done a lot of googling but I haven't managed to find anything that exactly addresses this issue. I've also tried reading the zsh documentation but again I couldn't find anything that obviously relates to this.
Thanks for any pointers.
I run some installation scripts via docker, they change ~/.bashrc but then I need to source it to use installed commands in RUN instructions below.
Tried obvious RUN . ~/.bashrc and got /bin/sh: 13: /root/.bashrc: shopt: not found error.
Tried RUN . ~/.profile and got mesg: ttyname failed: Inappropriate ioctl for device
I do not want to use ENV instructions. The point of having external installation scripts is to use them in non-Docker environments, for example when running unit tests locally. ENV instructions would duplicate environment setup which is already done in installation scripts.
You should not try to set up shell dotfiles in Docker. Many typical paths do not run them at all; for example
# In a Dockerfile
CMD ["some", "command", "here"]
# From the command line
docker run myimage some command here
The Docker environment is, fundamentally, different from a standalone Linux system; in addition to shell dotfiles, "home directory" isn't really a Docker concept, and if you have a multi-part process, on Docker it's standard to run each part in a separate container, but on standalone Linux you could use the init system to keep all of the parts running together. If you're expecting things to work exactly the same with exactly the same installation scripts, a virtual machine would be a better technological match for what you're attempting.
("Inappropriate ioctl for device" also suggests that there are things in the dotfiles that strongly expect to be run from an actual terminal, which you don't necessarily have at docker build time.)
My generic advice here is:
If possible, install things in the "system" directories within the image and avoid needing custom environment variable settings. (Don't use a version manager like nvm or rvm; don't use a Python virtual environment.)
If you do have to set environment variables, ENV is the way to do it.
If you really can't do either of the above, you can set environment variables in an ENTRYPOINT script before launching the main process; but if it's important to you that variables show up in docker inspect or docker exec shells, they won't be set there.
(Also remember that each RUN command launches a new container with a totally new shell environment. You can RUN . .profile; foo, but the environment variable settings won't carry through to the next RUN line.)
after the installation following the instructions with
curl https://nixos.org/nix/install | sh
and logout/login, nix-env and nix-build are not found.
I had the problem with debian stretch and now with buster. What am I doing wrong?
The nix manual instructs to execute
source ~/.nix-profile/etc/profile.d/nix.sh
but the instructions printed after the execution say to do (I do not remember exactly)
./~/.nix-profile/etc/profile.d/nix.sh
and the same command is inserted into ~/.profile. The cause of the problem is the difference between . and source (see this superuser question). The script is setting up the $PATH variable in the environment and has the desired effect wtih source but no effect with . (which operates in its own shell and closes it at the end).
Cure:
change the line in .profile (or better move it to .bashrc) to
if [ -e /home/xxx/.nix-profile/etc/profile.d/nix.sh ]; then source /home/xxx/.nix-profile/etc/profile.d/nix.sh; fi
(xxx is your user name),
You need to add this recommended script.
For me only setting $PATH like this worked (in .profile)
export PATH="$PATH:/nix/var/nix/profiles/default/bin"
I am unable to run repo non-interactively inside a container as part of a freestyle job.
It prompts for the user-name and email. I got round that by doing a git config --global inside the job.
But then it does the color test, and that hangs indefinitely.
Looking at the source code for repo I see this
if os.isatty(0) and os.isatty(1) and not self.manifest.IsMirror:
if opt.config_name or self._ShouldConfigureUser():
self._ConfigureUser()
self._ConfigureColor()
So, I ran the following inside the container:
python -C "import os; print os.isatty(0), os.isatty(1)"
and, sure enough, it printed out True True
Looking at the Jenkins log, it launches the container with --tty specified, and there seems no way to configure that option.
I can't find a bash option to force a script to be run in a non-interactive shell. If I put the above python line in a file and execute it with almost any combination of commands and options, it still prints out True True
The only way I see something different is if I use I/O redirection
bash <a.sh
which prints out False True - i.e. stdin is not a tty, and
bash <a.sh >a.log
which prints False False.
For a complex script, are there any problems using the bash <script approach?
Does anyone know any jenkins magic to prevent docker being launched using --tty?
I know that the --tty is the culprit. I built the container locally and ran the following
$ docker run repotest python -c "import os;print os.isatty(0), os.isatty(1)"
False False
$ docker run --tty repotest python -c "import os;print os.isatty(0), os.isatty(1)"
True True
Running Versions:
repo: 1.12.37 (per Ubuntu 16.04 apt-get)
Jenkins: 2.149
Cloudbees Docker Plugin: 1.7.3
Container base is ubuntu:xenial
I'm using the "Build inside a docker container" option.
To run bash script repo_script.sh "non-interactively", or more exactly speaking without having terminals associated with standard streams, you could run your script simply as
repo_script.sh < /dev/null 2>&1 | cat
assuming you want to see the output the way you would see it running simply as repo_script.sh. By piping the standard output and error to a different process the file descriptor appears as a pipe and not TTY to repo_script.sh. You could also direct output to a file, or even to /dev/null if you do not care about the output:
log_file=/dev/null
repo_script.sh < /dev/null > "${log_file}" 2>&1
Running the script as
bash < repo_script.sh | cat
might would work too, though it is very unorthodox and to my mind hackish way of running a script just to break the association of TTY to the standard input. From script engine point of view, it is different to read a script program from a file than from standard input (which typically, if it is a terminal, is not seekable), so there might be some subtle differences that could possibly bite you in unexpected ways. This way does not as clearly communicate your intention to the next person that need to understand your code, and may lead to partial hair loss in that person due to extraneous head scratching.
There is no need for any bash options, just using the output directions from within the interpreting shell as above described is an easy-to-comprehend, multi-platform compatible standard convention for changing the standard stream associations.
P.S. I think it should be enough for your repo script to just test if the standard input is a TTY. It looks to me like the author of that script did not think deeply enough there. There is simply no use waiting for input if you do not have terminal device associated with standard input, and you could determine that everything needs to run without user interaction from there or stop with an error if that is not possible.
I'm trying to write (what I thought would be) a simple bash script that will:
run virtualenv to create a new environment at $1
activate the virtual environment
do some more stuff (install django, add django-admin.py to the virtualenv's path, etc.)
Step 1 works quite well, but I can't seem to activate the virtualenv. For those not familiar with virtualenv, it creates an activate file that activates the virtual environment. From the CLI, you run it using source
source $env_name/bin/activate
Where $env_name, obviously, is the name of the dir that the virtual env is installed in.
In my script, after creating the virtual environment, I store the path to the activate script like this:
activate="`pwd`/$ENV_NAME/bin/activate"
But when I call source "$activate", I get this:
/home/clawlor/bin/scripts/djangoenv: 20: source: not found
I know that $activate contains the correct path to the activate script, in fact I even test that a file is there before I call source. But source itself can't seem to find it. I've also tried running all of the steps manually in the CLI, where everything works fine.
In my research I found this script, which is similar to what I want but is also doing a lot of other things that I don't need, like storing all of the virtual environments in a ~/.virtualenv directory (or whatever is in $WORKON_HOME). But it seems to me that he is creating the path to activate, and calling source "$activate" in basically the same way I am.
Here is the script in its entirety:
#!/bin/sh
PYTHON_PATH=~/bin/python-2.6.1/bin/python
if [ $# = 1 ]
then
ENV_NAME="$1"
virtualenv -p $PYTHON_PATH --no-site-packages $ENV_NAME
activate="`pwd`/$ENV_NAME/bin/activate"
if [ ! -f "$activate" ]
then
echo "ERROR: activate not found at $activate"
return 1
fi
source "$activate"
else
echo 'Usage: djangoenv ENV_NAME'
fi
DISCLAIMER: My bash script-fu is pretty weak. I'm fairly comfortable at the CLI, but there may well be some extremely stupid reason this isn't working.
If you're writing a bash script, call it by name:
#!/bin/bash
/bin/sh is not guaranteed to be bash. This caused a ton of broken scripts in Ubuntu some years ago (IIRC).
The source builtin works just fine in bash; but you might as well just use dot like Norman suggested.
In the POSIX standard, which /bin/sh is supposed to respect, the command is . (a single dot), not source. The source command is a csh-ism that has been pulled into bash.
Try
. $env_name/bin/activate
Or if you must have non-POSIX bash-isms in your code, use #!/bin/bash.
In Ubuntu if you execute the script with sh scriptname.sh you get this problem.
Try executing the script with ./scriptname.sh instead.
best to add the full path of the file you intend to source.
eg
source ./.env instead of source .env
or source /var/www/html/site1/.env