Why does awk stop and wait if the filename contains = and how to work around that?
awk 'processing_script_here' my=file.txt
seems to stop and wait indefinitely...
What's going on here and how do I make it work ?
awk filenames
add a comment |
awk 'processing_script_here' my=file.txt
seems to stop and wait indefinitely...
What's going on here and how do I make it work ?
awk filenames
3
I've seen several comments about this so I thought I might as well ask a question so that we have an answer that can be easily found and linked to...
– don_crissti
Dec 22 at 20:44
related: unix.stackexchange.com/a/475013/308316
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:11
add a comment |
awk 'processing_script_here' my=file.txt
seems to stop and wait indefinitely...
What's going on here and how do I make it work ?
awk filenames
awk 'processing_script_here' my=file.txt
seems to stop and wait indefinitely...
What's going on here and how do I make it work ?
awk filenames
awk filenames
asked Dec 22 at 20:44
don_crissti
49.6k15130159
49.6k15130159
3
I've seen several comments about this so I thought I might as well ask a question so that we have an answer that can be easily found and linked to...
– don_crissti
Dec 22 at 20:44
related: unix.stackexchange.com/a/475013/308316
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:11
add a comment |
3
I've seen several comments about this so I thought I might as well ask a question so that we have an answer that can be easily found and linked to...
– don_crissti
Dec 22 at 20:44
related: unix.stackexchange.com/a/475013/308316
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:11
3
3
I've seen several comments about this so I thought I might as well ask a question so that we have an answer that can be easily found and linked to...
– don_crissti
Dec 22 at 20:44
I've seen several comments about this so I thought I might as well ask a question so that we have an answer that can be easily found and linked to...
– don_crissti
Dec 22 at 20:44
related: unix.stackexchange.com/a/475013/308316
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:11
related: unix.stackexchange.com/a/475013/308316
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:11
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
As Chris says, arguments of the form variablename=anything
are treated as variable assignment (that are performed at the time the arguments are processed as opposed to the (newer) -v var=value
ones which are performed before the BEGIN
statements) instead of input file names.
That can be useful in things like:
awk '{print $1}' FS=/ RS='n' file1 FS='n' RS= file2
Where you can specify a different FS
/RS
per file. It's also commonly used in:
awk '!file1_processed{a[$0]; next}; {...}' file1 file1_processed=1 file2
Which is a safer version of:
awk 'NR==FNR{a[$0]; next}; {...}' file1 file2
(which doesn't work if file1
is empty)
But that gets in the way when you have files whose name contains =
characters.
Now, that's only a problem when what's left of the first =
is a valid awk
variable name.
What constitutes a valid variable name in awk
is stricter than in sh
.
POSIX requires it to be something like:
[_a-zA-Z][_a-zA-Z0-9]*
With only characters of the portable character set. However the /usr/xpg4/bin/awk
of Solaris 11 at least is not compliant in that regard and allows any alphabetical characters in the locale in variable names, not just a-zA-Z.
So an argument like x+y=foo
or =bar
or ./foo=bar
is still treated as an input file name and not an assignment as what's left of the first =
is not a valid variable name. An argument like Stéphane=Chazelas.txt
may or may not depending on the awk
implementation and locale.
That's why with awk, it's recommended to use:
awk '...' ./*.txt
instead of
awk '...' *.txt
for instance to avoid the problem if you can't guarantee the name of the txt
files won't contain =
characters.
Also, beware that an argument like -vfoo=bar.txt
may be treated as an option if you use:
awk -f file.awk -vfoo=bar.txt
Again, using ./*.txt
works around that (using a ./
prefix also helps with files called -
which otherwise awk
understands as meaning standard input instead).
That's also why
#! /usr/bin/awk -f
shebangs don't really work. While the var=value
ones can be worked around by fixing the ARGV
values (add a ./
prefix) in a BEGIN
statement:
#! /usr/bin/awk -f
BEGIN {
for (i = 1; i < ARGC; i++)
if (ARGV[i] ~ /^[_[:alpha:]][_[:alnum:]]*=/)
ARGV[i] = "./" ARGV[i]
}
# rest of awk script
That won't help with the option ones as those ones are seen by awk
and not the awk
script.
One potential cosmetic issue with using that ./
prefix is it ends up in FILENAME
, but you can always use substr(FILENAME, 3)
to strip it if you don't want it.
The GNU implementation of awk
fixes all those issues with its -E
option.
After -E
, gawk expects only the path of the awk
script (where -
still means stdin) and then a list of input file paths only (and there, not even -
is treated specially).
It's specially designed for:
#! /usr/bin/gawk -E
shebangs where the list of arguments are always input files (note that you're still free to edit that ARGV
list in a BEGIN
statement).
You can also use it as:
gawk -e '...awk code here...' -E /dev/null *.txt
We use -E
with an empty script (/dev/null
) just to make sure those *.txt
afterwards are always treated as input files, even if they contain =
characters.
I don't see how the explicit path ending up in FILENAME is a problem. Either the awk script is general, in which case it should handle all kind of paths ending up in FILENAME (including but not limited to../foo
,/path/to/foo
and paths that are in a different encoding) -- in which casesubstr(FILENAME,3)
won't be enough, or it's a one shot script where the user basically knows what the filenames are -- in which case s/he probably shouldn't bother with any of them containing=
either ;-)
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:09
2
@mosvy I don't think it states so much that./
is a problem, but that it may be undesirable under certain conditions, such as cases where filename has to be included in the output, in which case./
should be redundant and unnecessary, so you'll need to get rid of it somehow. Here's at least one example. As for user knowing what filenames are - well, in this case we also know what filename is, but=
still gets in the way of proper processing. So can leading-
get in the way.
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
2 days ago
@mosvy, yes the idea is that you want to use the./
prefix to work around thatawk
(mis)feature but then you end up with a that./
on output which you may want to strip. See how to check if the first line of file contain a specific string? as an example.
– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
add a comment |
In most versions of awk, arguments after the program to execute are either:
- A file
- An assignment of the form
x=y
Since your filename is being interpreted as case #2, awk is still waiting for something to read on stdin (since it doesn't perceive that there has been any filename passed).
Portably, this behaviour is documented in POSIX:
Either of the following two types of argument can be intermixed:
- file: A pathname of a file that contains the input to be read, which is matched against the set of patterns in the program. If no file operands are specified, or if a file operand is '-', the standard input shall be used.
- assignment: An operand that begins with an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set, followed by the '=' character, shall specify a variable assignment rather than a pathname.
As such, portably, you have a few options (#1 is likely the least intrusive):
- Use
awk ... ./my=file
, which sidesteps this since.
is not "an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set". - Put the file on stdin using
awk ... < my=file
. However, this doesn't work well with multiple files. - Make a hardlink to the file temporarily, and use that. You can do something like
ln my=file my_file
, and then usemy_file
as normal. No copying will be performed, and both files will be backed by the same data and inode metadata. After using it, it's safe to remove the link created as the number of references to the inode will still be greater than 0.
6
Doesn't./my=file
work?% awk 'processing_script_here' ./my=file.txt awk: fatal: cannot open file ./my=file.txt' for reading (No such file or directory).
This should be portable because./my
isn't a valid variable name, so shouldn't be parsed that way.
– Stephen Harris
Dec 22 at 21:17
2
As that POSIX text says, the problem is only when the first=
is preceded by an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set. so a file path like++foo=bar.txt
or=foo
or./foo=bar
are all OK as that.
or+
is not a[_a-zA-Z]
.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 22 at 22:04
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy awk is external to the shell, so it doesn't matter which you use../my=file
will be passed through verbatim.
– Chris Down
Dec 23 at 0:00
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy, same forawk '{print $1,$2}' /etc/passwd
. The point is that having the shell open the file as opposed to awk doesn't make any difference as to whether it makes it seekable or not. Actually, inawk '{exit}' < /etc/passwd
, you'd expectawk
to seek back to the end of the first record upon thatexit
to make sure it leaves the position within stdin there. POSIX requires that./usr/xpg4/bin/awk
does it on Solaris, but neithergawk
normawk
seem to do it on GNU/Linux.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 23 at 0:28
3
@mosvy, see INPUT FILES section at pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/… It's useful in a number of usage patterns that only make sense with regular files like when you want to truncate a file or write data into it at a position identified byawk
that way.
– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
|
show 10 more comments
To quote gawk documentation ( note emphasis added ):
Any additional arguments on the command line are normally treated as input files to be processed in the order specified. However, an argument that has the form var=value, assigns the value value to the variable var—it does not specify a file at all.
Why does the command stop and wait ? Because in the form awk 'processing_script_here' my=file.txt
there is no file specified by the above definition - my=file.txt
is interpreted as variable assignment, and if there's no file defined awk
will read stdin ( also evident from strace
which shows that awk in such command is waiting on read(0,'...)
syscall.
This is also documented in POSIX awk specifications, see OPERANDS section and assignments part of that )
Variable assignment is evident in awk '{print foo}' foo=bar /etc/passwd
that value of foo
is printed for every line in /etc/passwd. Specifying ./foo=bar
or full path however does work.
Note that running strace
on awk '1' foo=bar
as well as checking with cat foo=bar
shows that this is awk-specific issue, and execve does show filename as argument passed, so shells have nothing to do with env variable assignments in this case.
Additionally, please note that awk '...script...' foo=bar
will not cause environment variable creation by shell, since environment variable assignments should be preceding a command to take effect. See POSIX Shell Grammar Rules, point number 7. Additionally this can be verified via awk '{print ENVIRON["foo"]}' foo=bar /etc/passwd
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f490524%2fwhy-does-awk-stop-and-wait-if-the-filename-contains-and-how-to-work-around-tha%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
As Chris says, arguments of the form variablename=anything
are treated as variable assignment (that are performed at the time the arguments are processed as opposed to the (newer) -v var=value
ones which are performed before the BEGIN
statements) instead of input file names.
That can be useful in things like:
awk '{print $1}' FS=/ RS='n' file1 FS='n' RS= file2
Where you can specify a different FS
/RS
per file. It's also commonly used in:
awk '!file1_processed{a[$0]; next}; {...}' file1 file1_processed=1 file2
Which is a safer version of:
awk 'NR==FNR{a[$0]; next}; {...}' file1 file2
(which doesn't work if file1
is empty)
But that gets in the way when you have files whose name contains =
characters.
Now, that's only a problem when what's left of the first =
is a valid awk
variable name.
What constitutes a valid variable name in awk
is stricter than in sh
.
POSIX requires it to be something like:
[_a-zA-Z][_a-zA-Z0-9]*
With only characters of the portable character set. However the /usr/xpg4/bin/awk
of Solaris 11 at least is not compliant in that regard and allows any alphabetical characters in the locale in variable names, not just a-zA-Z.
So an argument like x+y=foo
or =bar
or ./foo=bar
is still treated as an input file name and not an assignment as what's left of the first =
is not a valid variable name. An argument like Stéphane=Chazelas.txt
may or may not depending on the awk
implementation and locale.
That's why with awk, it's recommended to use:
awk '...' ./*.txt
instead of
awk '...' *.txt
for instance to avoid the problem if you can't guarantee the name of the txt
files won't contain =
characters.
Also, beware that an argument like -vfoo=bar.txt
may be treated as an option if you use:
awk -f file.awk -vfoo=bar.txt
Again, using ./*.txt
works around that (using a ./
prefix also helps with files called -
which otherwise awk
understands as meaning standard input instead).
That's also why
#! /usr/bin/awk -f
shebangs don't really work. While the var=value
ones can be worked around by fixing the ARGV
values (add a ./
prefix) in a BEGIN
statement:
#! /usr/bin/awk -f
BEGIN {
for (i = 1; i < ARGC; i++)
if (ARGV[i] ~ /^[_[:alpha:]][_[:alnum:]]*=/)
ARGV[i] = "./" ARGV[i]
}
# rest of awk script
That won't help with the option ones as those ones are seen by awk
and not the awk
script.
One potential cosmetic issue with using that ./
prefix is it ends up in FILENAME
, but you can always use substr(FILENAME, 3)
to strip it if you don't want it.
The GNU implementation of awk
fixes all those issues with its -E
option.
After -E
, gawk expects only the path of the awk
script (where -
still means stdin) and then a list of input file paths only (and there, not even -
is treated specially).
It's specially designed for:
#! /usr/bin/gawk -E
shebangs where the list of arguments are always input files (note that you're still free to edit that ARGV
list in a BEGIN
statement).
You can also use it as:
gawk -e '...awk code here...' -E /dev/null *.txt
We use -E
with an empty script (/dev/null
) just to make sure those *.txt
afterwards are always treated as input files, even if they contain =
characters.
I don't see how the explicit path ending up in FILENAME is a problem. Either the awk script is general, in which case it should handle all kind of paths ending up in FILENAME (including but not limited to../foo
,/path/to/foo
and paths that are in a different encoding) -- in which casesubstr(FILENAME,3)
won't be enough, or it's a one shot script where the user basically knows what the filenames are -- in which case s/he probably shouldn't bother with any of them containing=
either ;-)
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:09
2
@mosvy I don't think it states so much that./
is a problem, but that it may be undesirable under certain conditions, such as cases where filename has to be included in the output, in which case./
should be redundant and unnecessary, so you'll need to get rid of it somehow. Here's at least one example. As for user knowing what filenames are - well, in this case we also know what filename is, but=
still gets in the way of proper processing. So can leading-
get in the way.
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
2 days ago
@mosvy, yes the idea is that you want to use the./
prefix to work around thatawk
(mis)feature but then you end up with a that./
on output which you may want to strip. See how to check if the first line of file contain a specific string? as an example.
– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
add a comment |
As Chris says, arguments of the form variablename=anything
are treated as variable assignment (that are performed at the time the arguments are processed as opposed to the (newer) -v var=value
ones which are performed before the BEGIN
statements) instead of input file names.
That can be useful in things like:
awk '{print $1}' FS=/ RS='n' file1 FS='n' RS= file2
Where you can specify a different FS
/RS
per file. It's also commonly used in:
awk '!file1_processed{a[$0]; next}; {...}' file1 file1_processed=1 file2
Which is a safer version of:
awk 'NR==FNR{a[$0]; next}; {...}' file1 file2
(which doesn't work if file1
is empty)
But that gets in the way when you have files whose name contains =
characters.
Now, that's only a problem when what's left of the first =
is a valid awk
variable name.
What constitutes a valid variable name in awk
is stricter than in sh
.
POSIX requires it to be something like:
[_a-zA-Z][_a-zA-Z0-9]*
With only characters of the portable character set. However the /usr/xpg4/bin/awk
of Solaris 11 at least is not compliant in that regard and allows any alphabetical characters in the locale in variable names, not just a-zA-Z.
So an argument like x+y=foo
or =bar
or ./foo=bar
is still treated as an input file name and not an assignment as what's left of the first =
is not a valid variable name. An argument like Stéphane=Chazelas.txt
may or may not depending on the awk
implementation and locale.
That's why with awk, it's recommended to use:
awk '...' ./*.txt
instead of
awk '...' *.txt
for instance to avoid the problem if you can't guarantee the name of the txt
files won't contain =
characters.
Also, beware that an argument like -vfoo=bar.txt
may be treated as an option if you use:
awk -f file.awk -vfoo=bar.txt
Again, using ./*.txt
works around that (using a ./
prefix also helps with files called -
which otherwise awk
understands as meaning standard input instead).
That's also why
#! /usr/bin/awk -f
shebangs don't really work. While the var=value
ones can be worked around by fixing the ARGV
values (add a ./
prefix) in a BEGIN
statement:
#! /usr/bin/awk -f
BEGIN {
for (i = 1; i < ARGC; i++)
if (ARGV[i] ~ /^[_[:alpha:]][_[:alnum:]]*=/)
ARGV[i] = "./" ARGV[i]
}
# rest of awk script
That won't help with the option ones as those ones are seen by awk
and not the awk
script.
One potential cosmetic issue with using that ./
prefix is it ends up in FILENAME
, but you can always use substr(FILENAME, 3)
to strip it if you don't want it.
The GNU implementation of awk
fixes all those issues with its -E
option.
After -E
, gawk expects only the path of the awk
script (where -
still means stdin) and then a list of input file paths only (and there, not even -
is treated specially).
It's specially designed for:
#! /usr/bin/gawk -E
shebangs where the list of arguments are always input files (note that you're still free to edit that ARGV
list in a BEGIN
statement).
You can also use it as:
gawk -e '...awk code here...' -E /dev/null *.txt
We use -E
with an empty script (/dev/null
) just to make sure those *.txt
afterwards are always treated as input files, even if they contain =
characters.
I don't see how the explicit path ending up in FILENAME is a problem. Either the awk script is general, in which case it should handle all kind of paths ending up in FILENAME (including but not limited to../foo
,/path/to/foo
and paths that are in a different encoding) -- in which casesubstr(FILENAME,3)
won't be enough, or it's a one shot script where the user basically knows what the filenames are -- in which case s/he probably shouldn't bother with any of them containing=
either ;-)
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:09
2
@mosvy I don't think it states so much that./
is a problem, but that it may be undesirable under certain conditions, such as cases where filename has to be included in the output, in which case./
should be redundant and unnecessary, so you'll need to get rid of it somehow. Here's at least one example. As for user knowing what filenames are - well, in this case we also know what filename is, but=
still gets in the way of proper processing. So can leading-
get in the way.
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
2 days ago
@mosvy, yes the idea is that you want to use the./
prefix to work around thatawk
(mis)feature but then you end up with a that./
on output which you may want to strip. See how to check if the first line of file contain a specific string? as an example.
– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
add a comment |
As Chris says, arguments of the form variablename=anything
are treated as variable assignment (that are performed at the time the arguments are processed as opposed to the (newer) -v var=value
ones which are performed before the BEGIN
statements) instead of input file names.
That can be useful in things like:
awk '{print $1}' FS=/ RS='n' file1 FS='n' RS= file2
Where you can specify a different FS
/RS
per file. It's also commonly used in:
awk '!file1_processed{a[$0]; next}; {...}' file1 file1_processed=1 file2
Which is a safer version of:
awk 'NR==FNR{a[$0]; next}; {...}' file1 file2
(which doesn't work if file1
is empty)
But that gets in the way when you have files whose name contains =
characters.
Now, that's only a problem when what's left of the first =
is a valid awk
variable name.
What constitutes a valid variable name in awk
is stricter than in sh
.
POSIX requires it to be something like:
[_a-zA-Z][_a-zA-Z0-9]*
With only characters of the portable character set. However the /usr/xpg4/bin/awk
of Solaris 11 at least is not compliant in that regard and allows any alphabetical characters in the locale in variable names, not just a-zA-Z.
So an argument like x+y=foo
or =bar
or ./foo=bar
is still treated as an input file name and not an assignment as what's left of the first =
is not a valid variable name. An argument like Stéphane=Chazelas.txt
may or may not depending on the awk
implementation and locale.
That's why with awk, it's recommended to use:
awk '...' ./*.txt
instead of
awk '...' *.txt
for instance to avoid the problem if you can't guarantee the name of the txt
files won't contain =
characters.
Also, beware that an argument like -vfoo=bar.txt
may be treated as an option if you use:
awk -f file.awk -vfoo=bar.txt
Again, using ./*.txt
works around that (using a ./
prefix also helps with files called -
which otherwise awk
understands as meaning standard input instead).
That's also why
#! /usr/bin/awk -f
shebangs don't really work. While the var=value
ones can be worked around by fixing the ARGV
values (add a ./
prefix) in a BEGIN
statement:
#! /usr/bin/awk -f
BEGIN {
for (i = 1; i < ARGC; i++)
if (ARGV[i] ~ /^[_[:alpha:]][_[:alnum:]]*=/)
ARGV[i] = "./" ARGV[i]
}
# rest of awk script
That won't help with the option ones as those ones are seen by awk
and not the awk
script.
One potential cosmetic issue with using that ./
prefix is it ends up in FILENAME
, but you can always use substr(FILENAME, 3)
to strip it if you don't want it.
The GNU implementation of awk
fixes all those issues with its -E
option.
After -E
, gawk expects only the path of the awk
script (where -
still means stdin) and then a list of input file paths only (and there, not even -
is treated specially).
It's specially designed for:
#! /usr/bin/gawk -E
shebangs where the list of arguments are always input files (note that you're still free to edit that ARGV
list in a BEGIN
statement).
You can also use it as:
gawk -e '...awk code here...' -E /dev/null *.txt
We use -E
with an empty script (/dev/null
) just to make sure those *.txt
afterwards are always treated as input files, even if they contain =
characters.
As Chris says, arguments of the form variablename=anything
are treated as variable assignment (that are performed at the time the arguments are processed as opposed to the (newer) -v var=value
ones which are performed before the BEGIN
statements) instead of input file names.
That can be useful in things like:
awk '{print $1}' FS=/ RS='n' file1 FS='n' RS= file2
Where you can specify a different FS
/RS
per file. It's also commonly used in:
awk '!file1_processed{a[$0]; next}; {...}' file1 file1_processed=1 file2
Which is a safer version of:
awk 'NR==FNR{a[$0]; next}; {...}' file1 file2
(which doesn't work if file1
is empty)
But that gets in the way when you have files whose name contains =
characters.
Now, that's only a problem when what's left of the first =
is a valid awk
variable name.
What constitutes a valid variable name in awk
is stricter than in sh
.
POSIX requires it to be something like:
[_a-zA-Z][_a-zA-Z0-9]*
With only characters of the portable character set. However the /usr/xpg4/bin/awk
of Solaris 11 at least is not compliant in that regard and allows any alphabetical characters in the locale in variable names, not just a-zA-Z.
So an argument like x+y=foo
or =bar
or ./foo=bar
is still treated as an input file name and not an assignment as what's left of the first =
is not a valid variable name. An argument like Stéphane=Chazelas.txt
may or may not depending on the awk
implementation and locale.
That's why with awk, it's recommended to use:
awk '...' ./*.txt
instead of
awk '...' *.txt
for instance to avoid the problem if you can't guarantee the name of the txt
files won't contain =
characters.
Also, beware that an argument like -vfoo=bar.txt
may be treated as an option if you use:
awk -f file.awk -vfoo=bar.txt
Again, using ./*.txt
works around that (using a ./
prefix also helps with files called -
which otherwise awk
understands as meaning standard input instead).
That's also why
#! /usr/bin/awk -f
shebangs don't really work. While the var=value
ones can be worked around by fixing the ARGV
values (add a ./
prefix) in a BEGIN
statement:
#! /usr/bin/awk -f
BEGIN {
for (i = 1; i < ARGC; i++)
if (ARGV[i] ~ /^[_[:alpha:]][_[:alnum:]]*=/)
ARGV[i] = "./" ARGV[i]
}
# rest of awk script
That won't help with the option ones as those ones are seen by awk
and not the awk
script.
One potential cosmetic issue with using that ./
prefix is it ends up in FILENAME
, but you can always use substr(FILENAME, 3)
to strip it if you don't want it.
The GNU implementation of awk
fixes all those issues with its -E
option.
After -E
, gawk expects only the path of the awk
script (where -
still means stdin) and then a list of input file paths only (and there, not even -
is treated specially).
It's specially designed for:
#! /usr/bin/gawk -E
shebangs where the list of arguments are always input files (note that you're still free to edit that ARGV
list in a BEGIN
statement).
You can also use it as:
gawk -e '...awk code here...' -E /dev/null *.txt
We use -E
with an empty script (/dev/null
) just to make sure those *.txt
afterwards are always treated as input files, even if they contain =
characters.
edited 2 days ago
ilkkachu
55.5k783151
55.5k783151
answered Dec 22 at 22:34
Stéphane Chazelas
299k54563913
299k54563913
I don't see how the explicit path ending up in FILENAME is a problem. Either the awk script is general, in which case it should handle all kind of paths ending up in FILENAME (including but not limited to../foo
,/path/to/foo
and paths that are in a different encoding) -- in which casesubstr(FILENAME,3)
won't be enough, or it's a one shot script where the user basically knows what the filenames are -- in which case s/he probably shouldn't bother with any of them containing=
either ;-)
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:09
2
@mosvy I don't think it states so much that./
is a problem, but that it may be undesirable under certain conditions, such as cases where filename has to be included in the output, in which case./
should be redundant and unnecessary, so you'll need to get rid of it somehow. Here's at least one example. As for user knowing what filenames are - well, in this case we also know what filename is, but=
still gets in the way of proper processing. So can leading-
get in the way.
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
2 days ago
@mosvy, yes the idea is that you want to use the./
prefix to work around thatawk
(mis)feature but then you end up with a that./
on output which you may want to strip. See how to check if the first line of file contain a specific string? as an example.
– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
add a comment |
I don't see how the explicit path ending up in FILENAME is a problem. Either the awk script is general, in which case it should handle all kind of paths ending up in FILENAME (including but not limited to../foo
,/path/to/foo
and paths that are in a different encoding) -- in which casesubstr(FILENAME,3)
won't be enough, or it's a one shot script where the user basically knows what the filenames are -- in which case s/he probably shouldn't bother with any of them containing=
either ;-)
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:09
2
@mosvy I don't think it states so much that./
is a problem, but that it may be undesirable under certain conditions, such as cases where filename has to be included in the output, in which case./
should be redundant and unnecessary, so you'll need to get rid of it somehow. Here's at least one example. As for user knowing what filenames are - well, in this case we also know what filename is, but=
still gets in the way of proper processing. So can leading-
get in the way.
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
2 days ago
@mosvy, yes the idea is that you want to use the./
prefix to work around thatawk
(mis)feature but then you end up with a that./
on output which you may want to strip. See how to check if the first line of file contain a specific string? as an example.
– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
I don't see how the explicit path ending up in FILENAME is a problem. Either the awk script is general, in which case it should handle all kind of paths ending up in FILENAME (including but not limited to
../foo
, /path/to/foo
and paths that are in a different encoding) -- in which case substr(FILENAME,3)
won't be enough, or it's a one shot script where the user basically knows what the filenames are -- in which case s/he probably shouldn't bother with any of them containing =
either ;-)– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:09
I don't see how the explicit path ending up in FILENAME is a problem. Either the awk script is general, in which case it should handle all kind of paths ending up in FILENAME (including but not limited to
../foo
, /path/to/foo
and paths that are in a different encoding) -- in which case substr(FILENAME,3)
won't be enough, or it's a one shot script where the user basically knows what the filenames are -- in which case s/he probably shouldn't bother with any of them containing =
either ;-)– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:09
2
2
@mosvy I don't think it states so much that
./
is a problem, but that it may be undesirable under certain conditions, such as cases where filename has to be included in the output, in which case ./
should be redundant and unnecessary, so you'll need to get rid of it somehow. Here's at least one example. As for user knowing what filenames are - well, in this case we also know what filename is, but =
still gets in the way of proper processing. So can leading -
get in the way.– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
2 days ago
@mosvy I don't think it states so much that
./
is a problem, but that it may be undesirable under certain conditions, such as cases where filename has to be included in the output, in which case ./
should be redundant and unnecessary, so you'll need to get rid of it somehow. Here's at least one example. As for user knowing what filenames are - well, in this case we also know what filename is, but =
still gets in the way of proper processing. So can leading -
get in the way.– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
2 days ago
@mosvy, yes the idea is that you want to use the
./
prefix to work around that awk
(mis)feature but then you end up with a that ./
on output which you may want to strip. See how to check if the first line of file contain a specific string? as an example.– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
@mosvy, yes the idea is that you want to use the
./
prefix to work around that awk
(mis)feature but then you end up with a that ./
on output which you may want to strip. See how to check if the first line of file contain a specific string? as an example.– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
add a comment |
In most versions of awk, arguments after the program to execute are either:
- A file
- An assignment of the form
x=y
Since your filename is being interpreted as case #2, awk is still waiting for something to read on stdin (since it doesn't perceive that there has been any filename passed).
Portably, this behaviour is documented in POSIX:
Either of the following two types of argument can be intermixed:
- file: A pathname of a file that contains the input to be read, which is matched against the set of patterns in the program. If no file operands are specified, or if a file operand is '-', the standard input shall be used.
- assignment: An operand that begins with an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set, followed by the '=' character, shall specify a variable assignment rather than a pathname.
As such, portably, you have a few options (#1 is likely the least intrusive):
- Use
awk ... ./my=file
, which sidesteps this since.
is not "an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set". - Put the file on stdin using
awk ... < my=file
. However, this doesn't work well with multiple files. - Make a hardlink to the file temporarily, and use that. You can do something like
ln my=file my_file
, and then usemy_file
as normal. No copying will be performed, and both files will be backed by the same data and inode metadata. After using it, it's safe to remove the link created as the number of references to the inode will still be greater than 0.
6
Doesn't./my=file
work?% awk 'processing_script_here' ./my=file.txt awk: fatal: cannot open file ./my=file.txt' for reading (No such file or directory).
This should be portable because./my
isn't a valid variable name, so shouldn't be parsed that way.
– Stephen Harris
Dec 22 at 21:17
2
As that POSIX text says, the problem is only when the first=
is preceded by an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set. so a file path like++foo=bar.txt
or=foo
or./foo=bar
are all OK as that.
or+
is not a[_a-zA-Z]
.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 22 at 22:04
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy awk is external to the shell, so it doesn't matter which you use../my=file
will be passed through verbatim.
– Chris Down
Dec 23 at 0:00
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy, same forawk '{print $1,$2}' /etc/passwd
. The point is that having the shell open the file as opposed to awk doesn't make any difference as to whether it makes it seekable or not. Actually, inawk '{exit}' < /etc/passwd
, you'd expectawk
to seek back to the end of the first record upon thatexit
to make sure it leaves the position within stdin there. POSIX requires that./usr/xpg4/bin/awk
does it on Solaris, but neithergawk
normawk
seem to do it on GNU/Linux.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 23 at 0:28
3
@mosvy, see INPUT FILES section at pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/… It's useful in a number of usage patterns that only make sense with regular files like when you want to truncate a file or write data into it at a position identified byawk
that way.
– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
|
show 10 more comments
In most versions of awk, arguments after the program to execute are either:
- A file
- An assignment of the form
x=y
Since your filename is being interpreted as case #2, awk is still waiting for something to read on stdin (since it doesn't perceive that there has been any filename passed).
Portably, this behaviour is documented in POSIX:
Either of the following two types of argument can be intermixed:
- file: A pathname of a file that contains the input to be read, which is matched against the set of patterns in the program. If no file operands are specified, or if a file operand is '-', the standard input shall be used.
- assignment: An operand that begins with an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set, followed by the '=' character, shall specify a variable assignment rather than a pathname.
As such, portably, you have a few options (#1 is likely the least intrusive):
- Use
awk ... ./my=file
, which sidesteps this since.
is not "an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set". - Put the file on stdin using
awk ... < my=file
. However, this doesn't work well with multiple files. - Make a hardlink to the file temporarily, and use that. You can do something like
ln my=file my_file
, and then usemy_file
as normal. No copying will be performed, and both files will be backed by the same data and inode metadata. After using it, it's safe to remove the link created as the number of references to the inode will still be greater than 0.
6
Doesn't./my=file
work?% awk 'processing_script_here' ./my=file.txt awk: fatal: cannot open file ./my=file.txt' for reading (No such file or directory).
This should be portable because./my
isn't a valid variable name, so shouldn't be parsed that way.
– Stephen Harris
Dec 22 at 21:17
2
As that POSIX text says, the problem is only when the first=
is preceded by an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set. so a file path like++foo=bar.txt
or=foo
or./foo=bar
are all OK as that.
or+
is not a[_a-zA-Z]
.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 22 at 22:04
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy awk is external to the shell, so it doesn't matter which you use../my=file
will be passed through verbatim.
– Chris Down
Dec 23 at 0:00
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy, same forawk '{print $1,$2}' /etc/passwd
. The point is that having the shell open the file as opposed to awk doesn't make any difference as to whether it makes it seekable or not. Actually, inawk '{exit}' < /etc/passwd
, you'd expectawk
to seek back to the end of the first record upon thatexit
to make sure it leaves the position within stdin there. POSIX requires that./usr/xpg4/bin/awk
does it on Solaris, but neithergawk
normawk
seem to do it on GNU/Linux.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 23 at 0:28
3
@mosvy, see INPUT FILES section at pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/… It's useful in a number of usage patterns that only make sense with regular files like when you want to truncate a file or write data into it at a position identified byawk
that way.
– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
|
show 10 more comments
In most versions of awk, arguments after the program to execute are either:
- A file
- An assignment of the form
x=y
Since your filename is being interpreted as case #2, awk is still waiting for something to read on stdin (since it doesn't perceive that there has been any filename passed).
Portably, this behaviour is documented in POSIX:
Either of the following two types of argument can be intermixed:
- file: A pathname of a file that contains the input to be read, which is matched against the set of patterns in the program. If no file operands are specified, or if a file operand is '-', the standard input shall be used.
- assignment: An operand that begins with an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set, followed by the '=' character, shall specify a variable assignment rather than a pathname.
As such, portably, you have a few options (#1 is likely the least intrusive):
- Use
awk ... ./my=file
, which sidesteps this since.
is not "an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set". - Put the file on stdin using
awk ... < my=file
. However, this doesn't work well with multiple files. - Make a hardlink to the file temporarily, and use that. You can do something like
ln my=file my_file
, and then usemy_file
as normal. No copying will be performed, and both files will be backed by the same data and inode metadata. After using it, it's safe to remove the link created as the number of references to the inode will still be greater than 0.
In most versions of awk, arguments after the program to execute are either:
- A file
- An assignment of the form
x=y
Since your filename is being interpreted as case #2, awk is still waiting for something to read on stdin (since it doesn't perceive that there has been any filename passed).
Portably, this behaviour is documented in POSIX:
Either of the following two types of argument can be intermixed:
- file: A pathname of a file that contains the input to be read, which is matched against the set of patterns in the program. If no file operands are specified, or if a file operand is '-', the standard input shall be used.
- assignment: An operand that begins with an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set, followed by the '=' character, shall specify a variable assignment rather than a pathname.
As such, portably, you have a few options (#1 is likely the least intrusive):
- Use
awk ... ./my=file
, which sidesteps this since.
is not "an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set". - Put the file on stdin using
awk ... < my=file
. However, this doesn't work well with multiple files. - Make a hardlink to the file temporarily, and use that. You can do something like
ln my=file my_file
, and then usemy_file
as normal. No copying will be performed, and both files will be backed by the same data and inode metadata. After using it, it's safe to remove the link created as the number of references to the inode will still be greater than 0.
edited 2 days ago
answered Dec 22 at 20:53
Chris Down
79k14188202
79k14188202
6
Doesn't./my=file
work?% awk 'processing_script_here' ./my=file.txt awk: fatal: cannot open file ./my=file.txt' for reading (No such file or directory).
This should be portable because./my
isn't a valid variable name, so shouldn't be parsed that way.
– Stephen Harris
Dec 22 at 21:17
2
As that POSIX text says, the problem is only when the first=
is preceded by an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set. so a file path like++foo=bar.txt
or=foo
or./foo=bar
are all OK as that.
or+
is not a[_a-zA-Z]
.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 22 at 22:04
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy awk is external to the shell, so it doesn't matter which you use../my=file
will be passed through verbatim.
– Chris Down
Dec 23 at 0:00
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy, same forawk '{print $1,$2}' /etc/passwd
. The point is that having the shell open the file as opposed to awk doesn't make any difference as to whether it makes it seekable or not. Actually, inawk '{exit}' < /etc/passwd
, you'd expectawk
to seek back to the end of the first record upon thatexit
to make sure it leaves the position within stdin there. POSIX requires that./usr/xpg4/bin/awk
does it on Solaris, but neithergawk
normawk
seem to do it on GNU/Linux.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 23 at 0:28
3
@mosvy, see INPUT FILES section at pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/… It's useful in a number of usage patterns that only make sense with regular files like when you want to truncate a file or write data into it at a position identified byawk
that way.
– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
|
show 10 more comments
6
Doesn't./my=file
work?% awk 'processing_script_here' ./my=file.txt awk: fatal: cannot open file ./my=file.txt' for reading (No such file or directory).
This should be portable because./my
isn't a valid variable name, so shouldn't be parsed that way.
– Stephen Harris
Dec 22 at 21:17
2
As that POSIX text says, the problem is only when the first=
is preceded by an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set. so a file path like++foo=bar.txt
or=foo
or./foo=bar
are all OK as that.
or+
is not a[_a-zA-Z]
.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 22 at 22:04
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy awk is external to the shell, so it doesn't matter which you use../my=file
will be passed through verbatim.
– Chris Down
Dec 23 at 0:00
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy, same forawk '{print $1,$2}' /etc/passwd
. The point is that having the shell open the file as opposed to awk doesn't make any difference as to whether it makes it seekable or not. Actually, inawk '{exit}' < /etc/passwd
, you'd expectawk
to seek back to the end of the first record upon thatexit
to make sure it leaves the position within stdin there. POSIX requires that./usr/xpg4/bin/awk
does it on Solaris, but neithergawk
normawk
seem to do it on GNU/Linux.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 23 at 0:28
3
@mosvy, see INPUT FILES section at pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/… It's useful in a number of usage patterns that only make sense with regular files like when you want to truncate a file or write data into it at a position identified byawk
that way.
– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
6
6
Doesn't
./my=file
work? % awk 'processing_script_here' ./my=file.txt awk: fatal: cannot open file ./my=file.txt' for reading (No such file or directory).
This should be portable because ./my
isn't a valid variable name, so shouldn't be parsed that way.– Stephen Harris
Dec 22 at 21:17
Doesn't
./my=file
work? % awk 'processing_script_here' ./my=file.txt awk: fatal: cannot open file ./my=file.txt' for reading (No such file or directory).
This should be portable because ./my
isn't a valid variable name, so shouldn't be parsed that way.– Stephen Harris
Dec 22 at 21:17
2
2
As that POSIX text says, the problem is only when the first
=
is preceded by an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set. so a file path like ++foo=bar.txt
or =foo
or ./foo=bar
are all OK as that .
or +
is not a [_a-zA-Z]
.– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 22 at 22:04
As that POSIX text says, the problem is only when the first
=
is preceded by an underscore or alphabetic character from the portable character set (see the table in the Base Definitions volume of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 6.1, Portable Character Set), followed by a sequence of underscores, digits, and alphabetics from the portable character set. so a file path like ++foo=bar.txt
or =foo
or ./foo=bar
are all OK as that .
or +
is not a [_a-zA-Z]
.– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 22 at 22:04
1
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy awk is external to the shell, so it doesn't matter which you use.
./my=file
will be passed through verbatim.– Chris Down
Dec 23 at 0:00
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy awk is external to the shell, so it doesn't matter which you use.
./my=file
will be passed through verbatim.– Chris Down
Dec 23 at 0:00
1
1
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy, same for
awk '{print $1,$2}' /etc/passwd
. The point is that having the shell open the file as opposed to awk doesn't make any difference as to whether it makes it seekable or not. Actually, in awk '{exit}' < /etc/passwd
, you'd expect awk
to seek back to the end of the first record upon that exit
to make sure it leaves the position within stdin there. POSIX requires that. /usr/xpg4/bin/awk
does it on Solaris, but neither gawk
nor mawk
seem to do it on GNU/Linux.– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 23 at 0:28
@SergiyKolodyazhnyy, same for
awk '{print $1,$2}' /etc/passwd
. The point is that having the shell open the file as opposed to awk doesn't make any difference as to whether it makes it seekable or not. Actually, in awk '{exit}' < /etc/passwd
, you'd expect awk
to seek back to the end of the first record upon that exit
to make sure it leaves the position within stdin there. POSIX requires that. /usr/xpg4/bin/awk
does it on Solaris, but neither gawk
nor mawk
seem to do it on GNU/Linux.– Stéphane Chazelas
Dec 23 at 0:28
3
3
@mosvy, see INPUT FILES section at pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/… It's useful in a number of usage patterns that only make sense with regular files like when you want to truncate a file or write data into it at a position identified by
awk
that way.– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
@mosvy, see INPUT FILES section at pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/… It's useful in a number of usage patterns that only make sense with regular files like when you want to truncate a file or write data into it at a position identified by
awk
that way.– Stéphane Chazelas
2 days ago
|
show 10 more comments
To quote gawk documentation ( note emphasis added ):
Any additional arguments on the command line are normally treated as input files to be processed in the order specified. However, an argument that has the form var=value, assigns the value value to the variable var—it does not specify a file at all.
Why does the command stop and wait ? Because in the form awk 'processing_script_here' my=file.txt
there is no file specified by the above definition - my=file.txt
is interpreted as variable assignment, and if there's no file defined awk
will read stdin ( also evident from strace
which shows that awk in such command is waiting on read(0,'...)
syscall.
This is also documented in POSIX awk specifications, see OPERANDS section and assignments part of that )
Variable assignment is evident in awk '{print foo}' foo=bar /etc/passwd
that value of foo
is printed for every line in /etc/passwd. Specifying ./foo=bar
or full path however does work.
Note that running strace
on awk '1' foo=bar
as well as checking with cat foo=bar
shows that this is awk-specific issue, and execve does show filename as argument passed, so shells have nothing to do with env variable assignments in this case.
Additionally, please note that awk '...script...' foo=bar
will not cause environment variable creation by shell, since environment variable assignments should be preceding a command to take effect. See POSIX Shell Grammar Rules, point number 7. Additionally this can be verified via awk '{print ENVIRON["foo"]}' foo=bar /etc/passwd
add a comment |
To quote gawk documentation ( note emphasis added ):
Any additional arguments on the command line are normally treated as input files to be processed in the order specified. However, an argument that has the form var=value, assigns the value value to the variable var—it does not specify a file at all.
Why does the command stop and wait ? Because in the form awk 'processing_script_here' my=file.txt
there is no file specified by the above definition - my=file.txt
is interpreted as variable assignment, and if there's no file defined awk
will read stdin ( also evident from strace
which shows that awk in such command is waiting on read(0,'...)
syscall.
This is also documented in POSIX awk specifications, see OPERANDS section and assignments part of that )
Variable assignment is evident in awk '{print foo}' foo=bar /etc/passwd
that value of foo
is printed for every line in /etc/passwd. Specifying ./foo=bar
or full path however does work.
Note that running strace
on awk '1' foo=bar
as well as checking with cat foo=bar
shows that this is awk-specific issue, and execve does show filename as argument passed, so shells have nothing to do with env variable assignments in this case.
Additionally, please note that awk '...script...' foo=bar
will not cause environment variable creation by shell, since environment variable assignments should be preceding a command to take effect. See POSIX Shell Grammar Rules, point number 7. Additionally this can be verified via awk '{print ENVIRON["foo"]}' foo=bar /etc/passwd
add a comment |
To quote gawk documentation ( note emphasis added ):
Any additional arguments on the command line are normally treated as input files to be processed in the order specified. However, an argument that has the form var=value, assigns the value value to the variable var—it does not specify a file at all.
Why does the command stop and wait ? Because in the form awk 'processing_script_here' my=file.txt
there is no file specified by the above definition - my=file.txt
is interpreted as variable assignment, and if there's no file defined awk
will read stdin ( also evident from strace
which shows that awk in such command is waiting on read(0,'...)
syscall.
This is also documented in POSIX awk specifications, see OPERANDS section and assignments part of that )
Variable assignment is evident in awk '{print foo}' foo=bar /etc/passwd
that value of foo
is printed for every line in /etc/passwd. Specifying ./foo=bar
or full path however does work.
Note that running strace
on awk '1' foo=bar
as well as checking with cat foo=bar
shows that this is awk-specific issue, and execve does show filename as argument passed, so shells have nothing to do with env variable assignments in this case.
Additionally, please note that awk '...script...' foo=bar
will not cause environment variable creation by shell, since environment variable assignments should be preceding a command to take effect. See POSIX Shell Grammar Rules, point number 7. Additionally this can be verified via awk '{print ENVIRON["foo"]}' foo=bar /etc/passwd
To quote gawk documentation ( note emphasis added ):
Any additional arguments on the command line are normally treated as input files to be processed in the order specified. However, an argument that has the form var=value, assigns the value value to the variable var—it does not specify a file at all.
Why does the command stop and wait ? Because in the form awk 'processing_script_here' my=file.txt
there is no file specified by the above definition - my=file.txt
is interpreted as variable assignment, and if there's no file defined awk
will read stdin ( also evident from strace
which shows that awk in such command is waiting on read(0,'...)
syscall.
This is also documented in POSIX awk specifications, see OPERANDS section and assignments part of that )
Variable assignment is evident in awk '{print foo}' foo=bar /etc/passwd
that value of foo
is printed for every line in /etc/passwd. Specifying ./foo=bar
or full path however does work.
Note that running strace
on awk '1' foo=bar
as well as checking with cat foo=bar
shows that this is awk-specific issue, and execve does show filename as argument passed, so shells have nothing to do with env variable assignments in this case.
Additionally, please note that awk '...script...' foo=bar
will not cause environment variable creation by shell, since environment variable assignments should be preceding a command to take effect. See POSIX Shell Grammar Rules, point number 7. Additionally this can be verified via awk '{print ENVIRON["foo"]}' foo=bar /etc/passwd
edited Dec 23 at 3:19
answered Dec 22 at 22:11
Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
8,27212152
8,27212152
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f490524%2fwhy-does-awk-stop-and-wait-if-the-filename-contains-and-how-to-work-around-tha%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
I've seen several comments about this so I thought I might as well ask a question so that we have an answer that can be easily found and linked to...
– don_crissti
Dec 22 at 20:44
related: unix.stackexchange.com/a/475013/308316
– mosvy
Dec 23 at 4:11