Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
Mark Shuttleworth at LinuxTagMark Shuttleworth at LinuxTagPosted Jun 16, 2010 11:57 UTC (Wed) by mgedmin (subscriber, #34497)In reply to: Mark Shuttleworth at LinuxTag by dgm Parent article: Mark Shuttleworth at LinuxTag
I ended up writing a small shell script to enable/disable my proxy config with gconftool:
$ cat /home/mg/bin/proxy-on
$ cat /home/mg/bin/proxy-off
(Log in to post comments)
Mark Shuttleworth at LinuxTag Posted Jun 17, 2010 10:57 UTC (Thu) by zzxtty (subscriber, #45175) [Link]
Eek, isn't this what aliases are for?!
Mark Shuttleworth at LinuxTag Posted Jun 17, 2010 13:42 UTC (Thu) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]
You mean functions?
Mark Shuttleworth at LinuxTag Posted Jun 18, 2010 13:33 UTC (Fri) by zzxtty (subscriber, #45175) [Link]
I'm a tcsh man, not bash, but a quick look at the bash manpages suggests aliases are the correct term in this case. I would use an alias for a single command, functions appear to deal with multiple commands or more complex logic.
These should do the trick (untested):
A 'script'* would have to spawn a new shell to process the command, rather inefficient.
*I can't quite bring myself to call a one liner a script!
Mark Shuttleworth at LinuxTag Posted Jun 19, 2010 16:31 UTC (Sat) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
> A 'script'* would have to spawn a new shell to process the command, rather inefficient.
True. In those situations where you want to switch your proxy 300 times per second, this is very important! ;)
Trading some performance for modularity and maintainability is usually a pretty good idea.
Mark Shuttleworth at LinuxTag Posted Jun 21, 2010 6:50 UTC (Mon) by zzxtty (subscriber, #45175) [Link]
"True. In those situations where you want to switch your proxy 300 times per second, this is very important! ;)"
Well you never know... No, from a performance point of view you are quite right. However I have been in the situation where I've been on machines which are constantly running out of process ids and every little helps (eg: echo *). Admittedly I don't see switching your proxy on and off would be a particularly high priority in such a situation!
"Trading some performance for modularity and maintainability is usually a pretty good idea."
You've lost me slightly there, I would have thought having one .cshrc (or .bashrc?) would be more maintainable than a bin directory full of separate files. I guess we all have our preferred ways of working!
Mark Shuttleworth at LinuxTag Posted Jun 25, 2010 10:54 UTC (Fri) by robbe (guest, #16131) [Link]
The PID overrun can also be thwarted by using "exec gconftool..." in the OP's scripts.
My maintainability concern with putting aliases in .bashrc is that only a single shell sees that.
Coming back to performance, the alias solution does incur the (small) per-shell cost of reading, parsing, and keeping in memory the alias, when in most shells you will never need it.
IIRC zsh has one-per-file functions that can reside in a directory somewhere. This is probably the optimal solution here: as maintainable as a shell script, loaded on demand, does not fork a new shell.
Mark Shuttleworth at LinuxTag Posted Jun 28, 2010 20:01 UTC (Mon) by bjartur (subscriber, #67801) [Link] Similiar to asource then?
|
|||||||||||||