How is the wildcard * interpreted as a command?2019 Community Moderator ElectionWorking of the [0-9]Execute command within variableInternal expansion with the find command and wildcard characterCan a bash script tell what directory the user is when they run the script?Selecting non-existent files with wildcard/regexFind wildcard search not working in /etcPurpose of '&& bash' in a command (not the '&&' part, the 'bash' part)Why does a 'sudo -i' login shell break a here-doc command string argument?Bash script copy file to user's (wildcard) home dirBash wget with variables and wildcard
weren't playing vs didn't play
Are there historical instances of the capital of a colonising country being temporarily or permanently shifted to one of its colonies?
What problems would a superhuman have whose skin is constantly hot?
They call me Inspector Morse
Can Mathematica be used to create an Artistic 3D extrusion from a 2D image and wrap a line pattern around it?
Do items de-spawn in Diablo?
How many characters using PHB rules does it take to be able to have access to any PHB spell at the start of an adventuring day?
PTIJ: wiping amalek’s memory?
What are some noteworthy "mic-drop" moments in math?
How is the wildcard * interpreted as a command?
Is it possible to avoid unpacking when merging Association?
If I receive a SOS signal, what is the proper response?
Vocabulary for giving just numbers, not a full answer
Counting all the hearts
Sort with one element at the end
finite abelian groups tensor product.
Linux Ubuntu 18.04 Full Backup
Can I pump my MTB tire to max (55 psi / 380 kPa) without the tube inside bursting?
In the late 1940’s to early 1950’s what technology was available that could melt a LOT of ice?
Is "conspicuously missing" or "conspicuously" the subject of this sentence?
When traveling to Europe from North America, do I need to purchase a different power strip?
Reverse string, can I make it faster?
Was Luke Skywalker the leader of the Rebel forces on Hoth?
Are babies of evil humanoid species inherently evil?
How is the wildcard * interpreted as a command?
2019 Community Moderator ElectionWorking of the [0-9]Execute command within variableInternal expansion with the find command and wildcard characterCan a bash script tell what directory the user is when they run the script?Selecting non-existent files with wildcard/regexFind wildcard search not working in /etcPurpose of '&& bash' in a command (not the '&&' part, the 'bash' part)Why does a 'sudo -i' login shell break a here-doc command string argument?Bash script copy file to user's (wildcard) home dirBash wget with variables and wildcard
I know how * is interpreted in commands like ls for example. But when trying to run * as a command the shell tries to execute the first file or directory in your working directory. Why is this? How does the shell understand *?
bash wildcards
edited 1 hour ago
Glorfindel
2971411
asked 3 hours ago
osmakosmak
83
New contributor
osmak is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I know how * is interpreted in commands like ls for example. But when trying to run * as a command the shell tries to execute the first file or directory in your working directory. Why is this? How does the shell understand *?
bash wildcards
edited 1 hour ago
Glorfindel
2971411
asked 3 hours ago
osmakosmak
83
New contributor
osmak is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
I know how * is interpreted in commands like ls for example. But when trying to run * as a command the shell tries to execute the first file or directory in your working directory. Why is this? How does the shell understand *?
bash wildcards
edited 1 hour ago
Glorfindel
2971411
asked 3 hours ago
osmakosmak
83
New contributor
osmak is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I know how * is interpreted in commands like ls for example. But when trying to run * as a command the shell tries to execute the first file or directory in your working directory. Why is this? How does the shell understand *?
bash wildcards
bash wildcards
edited 1 hour ago
Glorfindel
2971411
asked 3 hours ago
osmakosmak
83
New contributor
osmak is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 1 hour ago
Glorfindel
2971411
asked 3 hours ago
osmakosmak
83
New contributor
osmak is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 1 hour ago
Glorfindel
2971411
edited 1 hour ago
Glorfindel
2971411
edited 1 hour ago
Glorfindel
2971411
2971411
asked 3 hours ago
osmakosmak
83
New contributor
osmak is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 3 hours ago
osmakosmak
83
asked 3 hours ago
osmakosmak
83
83
New contributor
osmak is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
osmak is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
osmak is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
That's quite simple, actually. Unlike in some other operating systems, in Unixes, it's the shell that expands filename wildcards. It expands parameter expansions and globs first, then uses the (now) first word as the name for the command to run.
This is also why files named with a leading dash can be troublesome: a glob like * will expand to the file names, and a name starting with a dash may be taken as an option. (The scary example being that a file called -r in the working directory would make rm * remove everything recursively...)
Usually, one wouldn't use * as the first item on any command line, though, so having the first file determine the command to run in that case isn't likely to cause problems.
answered 3 hours ago
ilkkachuilkkachu
60.9k1098174
I think this example misses an important point out, that filename expansion is not subject to further field splitting, unlike parameter expansion, so filenames with spaces are still safe.
– Michael Homer
2 hours ago
OK, so I think I misunderstood how the * work in the first place. I thought that it is a common syntax used in Linux commands. But, if I understood your answer correctly, then filename expansion is a shell feature not a command feature. So what happened is that * got replaced by all file or directory names in PWD but when the shell tried executing the first one it produced the error I saw.
– osmak
2 hours ago
@osmak, yeah, it's a shell feature on Unixes. Easier that way, so each and every program doesn't have to implement it. Though of course programs likefindknow how to expand similar patterns, too (e.g.file -name "*.txt")
– ilkkachu
2 hours ago
@osmak That is a correct understanding.
– Kusalananda
2 hours ago
1
A file named-ris bad, but one named-rfis even worse.
– Monty Harder
20 mins ago
|
show 4 more comments
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
);
);
osmak is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
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%2f505707%2fhow-is-the-wildcard-interpreted-as-a-command%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
That's quite simple, actually. Unlike in some other operating systems, in Unixes, it's the shell that expands filename wildcards. It expands parameter expansions and globs first, then uses the (now) first word as the name for the command to run.
This is also why files named with a leading dash can be troublesome: a glob like * will expand to the file names, and a name starting with a dash may be taken as an option. (The scary example being that a file called -r in the working directory would make rm * remove everything recursively...)
Usually, one wouldn't use * as the first item on any command line, though, so having the first file determine the command to run in that case isn't likely to cause problems.
answered 3 hours ago
ilkkachuilkkachu
60.9k1098174
I think this example misses an important point out, that filename expansion is not subject to further field splitting, unlike parameter expansion, so filenames with spaces are still safe.
– Michael Homer
2 hours ago
OK, so I think I misunderstood how the * work in the first place. I thought that it is a common syntax used in Linux commands. But, if I understood your answer correctly, then filename expansion is a shell feature not a command feature. So what happened is that * got replaced by all file or directory names in PWD but when the shell tried executing the first one it produced the error I saw.
– osmak
2 hours ago
@osmak, yeah, it's a shell feature on Unixes. Easier that way, so each and every program doesn't have to implement it. Though of course programs likefindknow how to expand similar patterns, too (e.g.file -name "*.txt")
– ilkkachu
2 hours ago
@osmak That is a correct understanding.
– Kusalananda
2 hours ago
1
A file named-ris bad, but one named-rfis even worse.
– Monty Harder
20 mins ago
|
show 4 more comments
That's quite simple, actually. Unlike in some other operating systems, in Unixes, it's the shell that expands filename wildcards. It expands parameter expansions and globs first, then uses the (now) first word as the name for the command to run.
This is also why files named with a leading dash can be troublesome: a glob like * will expand to the file names, and a name starting with a dash may be taken as an option. (The scary example being that a file called -r in the working directory would make rm * remove everything recursively...)
Usually, one wouldn't use * as the first item on any command line, though, so having the first file determine the command to run in that case isn't likely to cause problems.
answered 3 hours ago
ilkkachuilkkachu
60.9k1098174
I think this example misses an important point out, that filename expansion is not subject to further field splitting, unlike parameter expansion, so filenames with spaces are still safe.
– Michael Homer
2 hours ago
OK, so I think I misunderstood how the * work in the first place. I thought that it is a common syntax used in Linux commands. But, if I understood your answer correctly, then filename expansion is a shell feature not a command feature. So what happened is that * got replaced by all file or directory names in PWD but when the shell tried executing the first one it produced the error I saw.
– osmak
2 hours ago
@osmak, yeah, it's a shell feature on Unixes. Easier that way, so each and every program doesn't have to implement it. Though of course programs likefindknow how to expand similar patterns, too (e.g.file -name "*.txt")
– ilkkachu
2 hours ago
@osmak That is a correct understanding.
– Kusalananda
2 hours ago
1
A file named-ris bad, but one named-rfis even worse.
– Monty Harder
20 mins ago
|
show 4 more comments
That's quite simple, actually. Unlike in some other operating systems, in Unixes, it's the shell that expands filename wildcards. It expands parameter expansions and globs first, then uses the (now) first word as the name for the command to run.
This is also why files named with a leading dash can be troublesome: a glob like * will expand to the file names, and a name starting with a dash may be taken as an option. (The scary example being that a file called -r in the working directory would make rm * remove everything recursively...)
Usually, one wouldn't use * as the first item on any command line, though, so having the first file determine the command to run in that case isn't likely to cause problems.
answered 3 hours ago
ilkkachuilkkachu
60.9k1098174
That's quite simple, actually. Unlike in some other operating systems, in Unixes, it's the shell that expands filename wildcards. It expands parameter expansions and globs first, then uses the (now) first word as the name for the command to run.
This is also why files named with a leading dash can be troublesome: a glob like * will expand to the file names, and a name starting with a dash may be taken as an option. (The scary example being that a file called -r in the working directory would make rm * remove everything recursively...)
Usually, one wouldn't use * as the first item on any command line, though, so having the first file determine the command to run in that case isn't likely to cause problems.
answered 3 hours ago
ilkkachuilkkachu
60.9k1098174
edited 1 hour ago
answered 3 hours ago
ilkkachuilkkachu
60.9k1098174
answered 3 hours ago
ilkkachuilkkachu
60.9k1098174
answered 3 hours ago
ilkkachuilkkachu
60.9k1098174
60.9k1098174
I think this example misses an important point out, that filename expansion is not subject to further field splitting, unlike parameter expansion, so filenames with spaces are still safe.
– Michael Homer
2 hours ago
OK, so I think I misunderstood how the * work in the first place. I thought that it is a common syntax used in Linux commands. But, if I understood your answer correctly, then filename expansion is a shell feature not a command feature. So what happened is that * got replaced by all file or directory names in PWD but when the shell tried executing the first one it produced the error I saw.
– osmak
2 hours ago
@osmak, yeah, it's a shell feature on Unixes. Easier that way, so each and every program doesn't have to implement it. Though of course programs likefindknow how to expand similar patterns, too (e.g.file -name "*.txt")
– ilkkachu
2 hours ago
@osmak That is a correct understanding.
– Kusalananda
2 hours ago
1
A file named-ris bad, but one named-rfis even worse.
– Monty Harder
20 mins ago
|
show 4 more comments
I think this example misses an important point out, that filename expansion is not subject to further field splitting, unlike parameter expansion, so filenames with spaces are still safe.
– Michael Homer
2 hours ago
OK, so I think I misunderstood how the * work in the first place. I thought that it is a common syntax used in Linux commands. But, if I understood your answer correctly, then filename expansion is a shell feature not a command feature. So what happened is that * got replaced by all file or directory names in PWD but when the shell tried executing the first one it produced the error I saw.
– osmak
2 hours ago
@osmak, yeah, it's a shell feature on Unixes. Easier that way, so each and every program doesn't have to implement it. Though of course programs likefindknow how to expand similar patterns, too (e.g.file -name "*.txt")
– ilkkachu
2 hours ago
@osmak That is a correct understanding.
– Kusalananda
2 hours ago
1
A file named-ris bad, but one named-rfis even worse.
– Monty Harder
20 mins ago
I think this example misses an important point out, that filename expansion is not subject to further field splitting, unlike parameter expansion, so filenames with spaces are still safe.
– Michael Homer
2 hours ago
I think this example misses an important point out, that filename expansion is not subject to further field splitting, unlike parameter expansion, so filenames with spaces are still safe.
– Michael Homer
2 hours ago
OK, so I think I misunderstood how the * work in the first place. I thought that it is a common syntax used in Linux commands. But, if I understood your answer correctly, then filename expansion is a shell feature not a command feature. So what happened is that * got replaced by all file or directory names in PWD but when the shell tried executing the first one it produced the error I saw.
– osmak
2 hours ago
OK, so I think I misunderstood how the * work in the first place. I thought that it is a common syntax used in Linux commands. But, if I understood your answer correctly, then filename expansion is a shell feature not a command feature. So what happened is that * got replaced by all file or directory names in PWD but when the shell tried executing the first one it produced the error I saw.
– osmak
2 hours ago
@osmak, yeah, it's a shell feature on Unixes. Easier that way, so each and every program doesn't have to implement it. Though of course programs like
find know how to expand similar patterns, too (e.g. file -name "*.txt")– ilkkachu
2 hours ago
@osmak, yeah, it's a shell feature on Unixes. Easier that way, so each and every program doesn't have to implement it. Though of course programs like
find know how to expand similar patterns, too (e.g. file -name "*.txt")– ilkkachu
2 hours ago
@osmak That is a correct understanding.
– Kusalananda
2 hours ago
@osmak That is a correct understanding.
– Kusalananda
2 hours ago
1
1
A file named
-r is bad, but one named -rf is even worse.– Monty Harder
20 mins ago
A file named
-r is bad, but one named -rf is even worse.– Monty Harder
20 mins ago
|
show 4 more comments
osmak is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
osmak is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
osmak is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
osmak is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
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.
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%2f505707%2fhow-is-the-wildcard-interpreted-as-a-command%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
-bash, wildcards
