kmont@hpindda.HP.COM (Kevin Montgomery) (10/25/88)
Hate to be this cluelessly stupid, but something's been bugging the
hell out of me- how do you do the Bourne :
a.out 1> file.stdout 2> file.stderr
in the csh? ("a.out > file.stdout >& file.stderr" doesn't cut it,
since ">&" is defined to be BOTH stdout and stderr, hence is an
ambiguous redirection)
adv -thanks- ance,
kevin, normally not so clueless
ps: if anyone sez 'sh "a.out 1> file.stdout 2> file.stderr"', they
will be shot.
pps: no, I don't like bourne, so stop flaming.
ppps: yes, I can write a "Y" program easily to do it, but it should be
possible in the csh already.kmont@hpindda.HP.COM (Kevin Montgomery) (10/26/88)
thanks to everyone that responded: "(a.out > file.out) >& file.err" it is... kevin
dempsey@handel.colostate.edu. (Steve Dempsey) (10/26/88)
In article <4470006@hpindda.HP.COM> kmont@hpindda.HP.COM (Kevin Montgomery) writes: > >Hate to be this cluelessly stupid, but something's been bugging the >hell out of me- how do you do the Bourne : > > a.out 1> file.stdout 2> file.stderr > >in the csh? ("a.out > file.stdout >& file.stderr" doesn't cut it, >since ">&" is defined to be BOTH stdout and stderr, hence is an >ambiguous redirection) > adv -thanks- ance, > kevin, normally not so clueless This is far from obvious, so no need to feel cluelessly stupid: ( a.out > file.stdout ) >& file.stderr /\ \Steve Dempsey, Center For \steved@longs.LANCE.ColoState.Edu \/ _|/ _ _\Computer Assisted Engineering\dempsey@handel.CS.ColoState.Edu /\ | (_) | |_(_)\Colorado State University \...!ncar!handel!dempsey /_/_/(_/\_/ V \_ \Fort Collins, CO 80523 \(303)-491-0630
matthew@sunpix.UUCP ( Sun NCAA) (10/26/88)
> Hate to be this cluelessly stupid, but something's been bugging the > hell out of me- how do you do the Bourne : > > a.out 1> file.stdout 2> file.stderr > > in the csh? ("a.out > file.stdout >& file.stderr" doesn't cut it, > since ">&" is defined to be BOTH stdout and stderr, hence is an > ambiguous redirection) > Check out this little clipping from my online man page. The only way to direct the standard output and standard error separately is by invoking a subshell, as follows: tutorial% (command > outfile) >& errorfile Although robust enough for general use, adventures into the esoteric periphery of the C-Shell may reveal unexpected quirks. -- Matthew Lee Stier (919) 469-8300| Sun Microsystems --- RTP, NC 27560| "Wisconsin Escapee" uucp: {sun, rti}!sunpix!matthew |
asa@unisoft.UUCP (Asa Romberger) (10/26/88)
In article <4470006@hpindda.HP.COM> kmont@hpindda.HP.COM (Kevin Montgomery) writes: > >hell out of me- how do you do the Bourne : > > a.out 1> file.stdout 2> file.stderr > >in the csh? (a.out > file.stdout) >& file.stderr I have found no other way! The ambiguity is eliminated because it is separate shells.
lew@gsg.UUCP (Paul Lew) (10/27/88)
how about:
$ ( a.out > file.out ) >& file.err
Since csh |& and >& will put stdout and stderr together, the stdout from
subshell ( a.out > file.out ) will be empty and stderr will be redirected
to file.err.
--
Paul Lew {oliveb,harvard,decvax}!gsg!lew (UUCP)
General Systems Group, 5 Manor Parkway, Salem, NH 03079 (603) 893-1000maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath) (10/27/88)
(a.out > file.out) >& file.err # Grrrrrr!
--
George Bush: |Maarten Litmaath @ VU Amsterdam:
Capt. Slip of the Tongue |maart@cs.vu.nl, mcvax!botter!maartkamlesh@hpdstma.HP.COM (Kamlesh Gandhi) (10/27/88)
You might want to use the following under csh: % (a.out > file.out) >& file.error This will send your output to file.out and your errors to file.error Kamlesh
joe@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Joe Beckenbach) (10/27/88)
In his article kmont@hpindda.HP.COM (Kevin Montgomery) writes: >>Hate to be this cluelessly stupid, but something's been bugging the >>hell out of me- how do you do the Bourne : >> >> a.out 1> file.stdout 2> file.stderr >> >>in the csh? ("a.out > file.stdout >& file.stderr" doesn't cut it, >>since ">&" is defined to be BOTH stdout and stderr, hence is an >>ambiguous redirection) In his article dempsey@handel.colostate.edu..UUCP (Steve Dempsey) writes: >This is far from obvious, so no need to feel cluelessly stupid: > > ( a.out > file.stdout ) >& file.stderr I tried the most natural thing in the world: following the 'law of least astonishment'. I did a.out >&file.stderr >file.stdout and of course the rest is ambiguity. :-) Do any shells out there (besides sh) handle redirecting stderr INDEPENDENT of stdout? I think that csh was very naughty in mixing the streams-- do we have to try writing a public-domain shell in order to have a well-distributed sane shell? [ gsh! ;-) :-) have you beat me to the punch, FSF?] -- Joe Beckenbach joe@csvax.caltech.edu Caltech 256-80, Pasadena CA 91125 ... or have I not seen enough code yet to throw stones? 1/2 :-)
rar@nascom.UUCP (Alan Ramacher) (10/28/88)
In article <4470006@hpindda.HP.COM>, kmont@hpindda.HP.COM (Kevin Montgomery) writes: > > Hate to be this cluelessly stupid, but something's been bugging the > hell out of me- how do you do the Bourne : > > a.out 1> file.stdout 2> file.stderr > (a.out > file.stdout) >& file.stderr > in the csh? ("a.out > file.stdout >& file.stderr" doesn't cut it, > since ">&" is defined to be BOTH stdout and stderr, hence is an > ambiguous redirection) >
khb%chiba@Sun.COM (Keith Bierman - Sun Tactical Engineering) (10/28/88)
In article <8420@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> joe@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Joe Beckenbach) writes:
Do any shells out there (besides sh) handle redirecting stderr
INDEPENDENT of stdout?
ksh, as supplied by Cydrome did. I think it is part of the ksh defn.
Keith H. Bierman
It's Not My Fault ---- I Voted for Bill & Opusaida@porthos.csl.sri.com (Hitoshi Aida) (10/29/88)
Also, is there any good way to send message to stderr in csh? I mean just like echo "$1 not found" >&2 in sh. -------- Hitoshi AIDA Computer Science Lab, SRI International
levy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy) (10/29/88)
In article <75092@sun.uucp>, khb%chiba@Sun.COM (Keith Bierman - Sun Tactical Engineering) writes: > Do any shells out there (besides sh) handle redirecting stderr > INDEPENDENT of stdout? > ksh, as supplied by Cydrome did. I think it is part of the ksh defn. Yes it's part of the ksh definition. That's because ksh is a 99-44/100% upward-compatible superset of /bin/sh. (What's _tactical_ engineering? Is that a skunkworks-type operation?) -- |------------Dan Levy------------| THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED HEREIN ARE MINE ONLY | Bell Labs Area 61 (R.I.P., TTY)| AND ARE NOT TO BE IMPUTED TO AT&T. | Skokie, Illinois | |-----Path: att!ttbcad!levy-----|
guy@auspex.UUCP (Guy Harris) (10/29/88)
> Do any shells out there (besides sh) handle redirecting stderr > INDEPENDENT of stdout? > >ksh, as supplied by Cydrome did. I think it is part of the ksh defn. Either "ksh" stands for "Korn shell", in which case it doesn't really count - the Korn shell is supposed to be basically upward-compatible with the Bourne shell, so it handles redirecting stderr independently of stdout because the Bourne shell does - or it doesn't stand for "Korn shell", in which case 1) its creator should have thought of a better name, to avoid confusion and 2) some additional information on what this "ksh" is might be interesting.