Redirecting stdout to a file you don't have write permission on
When you attempt to modify a file without having write permissions on it, you get an error:
> touch /tmp/foo && sudo chown root /tmp/foo
> echo test > /tmp/foo
zsh: permission denied: /tmp/foo
Sudoing doesn't help, because it runs the command as root, but the shell handles redirecting stdout and opens the file as you anyway:
> sudo echo test > /tmp/foo
zsh: permission denied: /tmp/foo
Is there an easy way to redirect stdout to a file you don't have permission to write to, besides opening a shell as root and manipulating the file that way?
> sudo su
# echo test > /tmp/foo
shell permissions io-redirection sudo io
add a comment |
When you attempt to modify a file without having write permissions on it, you get an error:
> touch /tmp/foo && sudo chown root /tmp/foo
> echo test > /tmp/foo
zsh: permission denied: /tmp/foo
Sudoing doesn't help, because it runs the command as root, but the shell handles redirecting stdout and opens the file as you anyway:
> sudo echo test > /tmp/foo
zsh: permission denied: /tmp/foo
Is there an easy way to redirect stdout to a file you don't have permission to write to, besides opening a shell as root and manipulating the file that way?
> sudo su
# echo test > /tmp/foo
shell permissions io-redirection sudo io
2
Answer for a similar question from StackOverflow stackoverflow.com/questions/82256/…
– Cristian Ciupitu
Sep 3 '10 at 11:22
how can u dont have permission to a file you created yourself in tmp ? is it becuase of umask ?
– k961
Feb 16 '15 at 4:40
@k961 I usedchown
to change the owner; it was just an example
– Michael Mrozek♦
Feb 16 '15 at 6:56
add a comment |
When you attempt to modify a file without having write permissions on it, you get an error:
> touch /tmp/foo && sudo chown root /tmp/foo
> echo test > /tmp/foo
zsh: permission denied: /tmp/foo
Sudoing doesn't help, because it runs the command as root, but the shell handles redirecting stdout and opens the file as you anyway:
> sudo echo test > /tmp/foo
zsh: permission denied: /tmp/foo
Is there an easy way to redirect stdout to a file you don't have permission to write to, besides opening a shell as root and manipulating the file that way?
> sudo su
# echo test > /tmp/foo
shell permissions io-redirection sudo io
When you attempt to modify a file without having write permissions on it, you get an error:
> touch /tmp/foo && sudo chown root /tmp/foo
> echo test > /tmp/foo
zsh: permission denied: /tmp/foo
Sudoing doesn't help, because it runs the command as root, but the shell handles redirecting stdout and opens the file as you anyway:
> sudo echo test > /tmp/foo
zsh: permission denied: /tmp/foo
Is there an easy way to redirect stdout to a file you don't have permission to write to, besides opening a shell as root and manipulating the file that way?
> sudo su
# echo test > /tmp/foo
shell permissions io-redirection sudo io
shell permissions io-redirection sudo io
edited Dec 14 '10 at 15:20
xenoterracide
25.5k52158222
25.5k52158222
asked Aug 31 '10 at 6:18
Michael Mrozek♦Michael Mrozek
60.8k29187208
60.8k29187208
2
Answer for a similar question from StackOverflow stackoverflow.com/questions/82256/…
– Cristian Ciupitu
Sep 3 '10 at 11:22
how can u dont have permission to a file you created yourself in tmp ? is it becuase of umask ?
– k961
Feb 16 '15 at 4:40
@k961 I usedchown
to change the owner; it was just an example
– Michael Mrozek♦
Feb 16 '15 at 6:56
add a comment |
2
Answer for a similar question from StackOverflow stackoverflow.com/questions/82256/…
– Cristian Ciupitu
Sep 3 '10 at 11:22
how can u dont have permission to a file you created yourself in tmp ? is it becuase of umask ?
– k961
Feb 16 '15 at 4:40
@k961 I usedchown
to change the owner; it was just an example
– Michael Mrozek♦
Feb 16 '15 at 6:56
2
2
Answer for a similar question from StackOverflow stackoverflow.com/questions/82256/…
– Cristian Ciupitu
Sep 3 '10 at 11:22
Answer for a similar question from StackOverflow stackoverflow.com/questions/82256/…
– Cristian Ciupitu
Sep 3 '10 at 11:22
how can u dont have permission to a file you created yourself in tmp ? is it becuase of umask ?
– k961
Feb 16 '15 at 4:40
how can u dont have permission to a file you created yourself in tmp ? is it becuase of umask ?
– k961
Feb 16 '15 at 4:40
@k961 I used
chown
to change the owner; it was just an example– Michael Mrozek♦
Feb 16 '15 at 6:56
@k961 I used
chown
to change the owner; it was just an example– Michael Mrozek♦
Feb 16 '15 at 6:56
add a comment |
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
Yes, using tee
. So echo test > /tmp/foo
becomes
echo test | sudo tee /tmp/foo
You can also append (>>
)
echo test | sudo tee -a /tmp/foo
22
Tee will also output to stdout; sometimes you don't want the contents filling the screen. To fix this, doecho test | sudo tee /tmp/foo > /dev/null
– Shawn J. Goff
Dec 14 '10 at 15:20
How will you do it with heredoc?
– JohnDoea
Nov 19 '16 at 2:54
add a comment |
To replace the content of the file with the output of echo
(like the >
shell redirection operator).
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo
To write into the file (at the beginning, though you can use seek
to output at different offsets) without truncating (like the 1<>
Bourne shell operator):
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo conv=notrunc
To append to the file (like >>
), with GNU dd
:
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo oflag=append conv=notrunc
See also GNU dd
's conv=excl
to avoid clobbering an existing file (like with set -o noclobber
in POSIX shells) and conv=nocreat
for the opposite (only update an existing file).
clever! this alleviates the need to doecho test | sudo tee /tmp/foo >/dev/null
to discard the output.
– Adam Katz
Jan 14 '15 at 23:52
2
I may have to take that back;dd
is unreliable for that unless you're using obscure GNU-only optionsiflag=fullblock oflag=fullblock
, which remove the elegance of this answer. I'll stick withtee
.
– Adam Katz
Jan 16 '15 at 6:32
5
dd is reliable with the non-obscure bs=1
– umeboshi
Jan 25 '15 at 3:50
2
@umeboshi But reliable only if you're experienced enough to know exactly what you're doing. Fordd
can be fairly dangerous (if not to say: devastating) if only a slight mistake was made. So for new users, I'd rather recommend thetee
method to be on the safe shore.
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:38
1
@AdamKatz, in the case ofdd of=file
alone (withoutcount
/skip
...), it is reliable.iflag=fullblock
is not needed because heredd
writes on output what it has read on input. It doesn't matter if it was not full blocks.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Sep 12 '17 at 11:30
add a comment |
tee
is probably the best choice, but depending on your situation something like this may be enough:
sudo sh -c 'echo test > /tmp/foo'
1
3 problems:eval
instead of a simplesh -c
; -i, which will change your working dir; running the whole command as root, which might change it's behaviour or may introduce an unnecessary risk. why did this ever get an upvote?
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 10:38
4
you didn't, but it is misleading, generally bad and maybe even dangerous.
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 20:24
add a comment |
While I agree, that | sudo tee
is the canonical way, sometimes sed (here assuming GNU sed
) may work:
cat sudotest
line 1
sudo sed -i '1iitest' sudotest && cat sudotest
itest
line 1
sudo sed -i '$aatest' sudotest && cat sudotest
itest
line 1
atest
-i
modifies the file in place. 1i
means insert before line 1. $a
means append after last line.
Or copy to xclipboard:
somecommand | xclip
sudo gedit sudotest
move cursor to desired place, click middle mouse button to insert, save
1
This is worded like an Ancient Chinese riddle. Can't see to understand how this got so many upvotes. (hrmph)
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:36
@syntaxerror: Sir, I'm sorry, I'm not a native English speaker. If you specify what is unclear to you, I could try to improve my answer. Compared with 65 upvotes for Gert, 4 doesn't seem to be that many upvotes, either, don't you think?
– user unknown
Jan 30 '16 at 1:35
Well I would be pretty satisfied with 4 :-D Your English is not bad at all. It's just worded in a kind of terse techie nerdspeak. I must guess you're a coder. Coders amongst each other will understand themselves perfectly that way, but a non-coder must think it's worded like...as said.
– syntaxerror
Jan 31 '16 at 20:22
Note thatsed -i
does not actually modify the file in place - it creates a temporary file and renames it on exiting. So you won't be able to do something liketail -f ...
on the original file and see the output usingsed -i ...
while the pipeline is running
– Andrew Henle
Mar 14 '18 at 10:24
@AndrewHenle: Yes, since the size may be increased or shrinked, and since that's probably the case for most sed invocations, and you can't even - afaik - write to the same location on SSDs it's only a pseudo 'in place' operation. As a non native english speaker, may I ask for a brief expression, which isn't so likely misinterpreted? Just-i creates a new file of same name
or is there something more compact? I guess I likein place
, because it explains thei
. The gnu-sed manpage calls it in place too and the long flag is--in-place
.
– user unknown
Mar 14 '18 at 10:30
add a comment |
I have been kicking around in the back of my mind ideas for a similar problem, and came up with the following solutions:
sudo uncat
whereuncat
is a program that reads standard input and writes it to the file named on the command line, but I haven't writtenuncat
yet.sudocat
the variant ofsudoedit
that I haven't written yet that does a cleanersudo cat
orsudo uncat
.
or this little trick of using
sudoedit
with an EDITOR that is a shell script
#!/bin/sh
# uncat
cat > "$1"
which can be invoked as either
|sudo ./uncat file
or| EDITOR=./uncat sudoedit
but that has interesting side-effects.
cat
takes a list of files to concatinate, therefore uncat should take a list of files to un concatinate to. It would have to use magic to decide how much to put in each file. Alternative name includedog
,to-file
,redirect
.
– ctrl-alt-delor
Apr 15 '15 at 14:51
I can't think of any reason why I would wantuncat
when I havetee
.
– Wildcard
Sep 29 '15 at 9:26
1
Well,tee
has the trivial drawback that it writes its stdin to its stdout — which is trivially mitigated by redirecting the stdout to/dev/null
. Other alternatives includedd of=/tmp/foo
(mentioned in another answer), which writes status information to stderr, andcp /dev/stdin /tmp/foo
.
– Scott
Feb 17 '16 at 14:44
add a comment |
Use sponge from the moreutils package. It has the advantage that it does not write to stdout.
echo test | sudo sponge /tmp/foo
Use the -a option to append to a file instead of overwriting it.
1
I'm not sure what advantage not writing to stdout presents, but you could just redirect the output to/dev/null
if it were an issue
– Michael Mrozek♦
Dec 18 '16 at 4:41
1
Of course I can redirect to /dev/null, but the command is easier to read and type without the redirection. The advantage of not writing to stdout is that my terminal is not filled with rubbish.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:48
1
I would not install a package to spare a redirection, but I regularly use sponge, so it is already there.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:50
add a comment |
The error comes from the order in which the shell does things.
The redirection is handled before the shell even executes sudo
, and is therefore done with the permissions of the user that you are currently working as. Since you don't have write permissions to create/truncate the target of the redirection, you get a permission denied
error from the shell.
The solution is to guarantee that the output file is created under the identity given to you by sudo
, e.g. with tee
:
$ generate_output | sudo tee target_file
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%2f1416%2fredirecting-stdout-to-a-file-you-dont-have-write-permission-on%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Yes, using tee
. So echo test > /tmp/foo
becomes
echo test | sudo tee /tmp/foo
You can also append (>>
)
echo test | sudo tee -a /tmp/foo
22
Tee will also output to stdout; sometimes you don't want the contents filling the screen. To fix this, doecho test | sudo tee /tmp/foo > /dev/null
– Shawn J. Goff
Dec 14 '10 at 15:20
How will you do it with heredoc?
– JohnDoea
Nov 19 '16 at 2:54
add a comment |
Yes, using tee
. So echo test > /tmp/foo
becomes
echo test | sudo tee /tmp/foo
You can also append (>>
)
echo test | sudo tee -a /tmp/foo
22
Tee will also output to stdout; sometimes you don't want the contents filling the screen. To fix this, doecho test | sudo tee /tmp/foo > /dev/null
– Shawn J. Goff
Dec 14 '10 at 15:20
How will you do it with heredoc?
– JohnDoea
Nov 19 '16 at 2:54
add a comment |
Yes, using tee
. So echo test > /tmp/foo
becomes
echo test | sudo tee /tmp/foo
You can also append (>>
)
echo test | sudo tee -a /tmp/foo
Yes, using tee
. So echo test > /tmp/foo
becomes
echo test | sudo tee /tmp/foo
You can also append (>>
)
echo test | sudo tee -a /tmp/foo
edited Aug 31 '10 at 6:59
Warren Young
54.8k10143147
54.8k10143147
answered Aug 31 '10 at 6:47
GertGert
7,03122934
7,03122934
22
Tee will also output to stdout; sometimes you don't want the contents filling the screen. To fix this, doecho test | sudo tee /tmp/foo > /dev/null
– Shawn J. Goff
Dec 14 '10 at 15:20
How will you do it with heredoc?
– JohnDoea
Nov 19 '16 at 2:54
add a comment |
22
Tee will also output to stdout; sometimes you don't want the contents filling the screen. To fix this, doecho test | sudo tee /tmp/foo > /dev/null
– Shawn J. Goff
Dec 14 '10 at 15:20
How will you do it with heredoc?
– JohnDoea
Nov 19 '16 at 2:54
22
22
Tee will also output to stdout; sometimes you don't want the contents filling the screen. To fix this, do
echo test | sudo tee /tmp/foo > /dev/null
– Shawn J. Goff
Dec 14 '10 at 15:20
Tee will also output to stdout; sometimes you don't want the contents filling the screen. To fix this, do
echo test | sudo tee /tmp/foo > /dev/null
– Shawn J. Goff
Dec 14 '10 at 15:20
How will you do it with heredoc?
– JohnDoea
Nov 19 '16 at 2:54
How will you do it with heredoc?
– JohnDoea
Nov 19 '16 at 2:54
add a comment |
To replace the content of the file with the output of echo
(like the >
shell redirection operator).
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo
To write into the file (at the beginning, though you can use seek
to output at different offsets) without truncating (like the 1<>
Bourne shell operator):
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo conv=notrunc
To append to the file (like >>
), with GNU dd
:
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo oflag=append conv=notrunc
See also GNU dd
's conv=excl
to avoid clobbering an existing file (like with set -o noclobber
in POSIX shells) and conv=nocreat
for the opposite (only update an existing file).
clever! this alleviates the need to doecho test | sudo tee /tmp/foo >/dev/null
to discard the output.
– Adam Katz
Jan 14 '15 at 23:52
2
I may have to take that back;dd
is unreliable for that unless you're using obscure GNU-only optionsiflag=fullblock oflag=fullblock
, which remove the elegance of this answer. I'll stick withtee
.
– Adam Katz
Jan 16 '15 at 6:32
5
dd is reliable with the non-obscure bs=1
– umeboshi
Jan 25 '15 at 3:50
2
@umeboshi But reliable only if you're experienced enough to know exactly what you're doing. Fordd
can be fairly dangerous (if not to say: devastating) if only a slight mistake was made. So for new users, I'd rather recommend thetee
method to be on the safe shore.
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:38
1
@AdamKatz, in the case ofdd of=file
alone (withoutcount
/skip
...), it is reliable.iflag=fullblock
is not needed because heredd
writes on output what it has read on input. It doesn't matter if it was not full blocks.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Sep 12 '17 at 11:30
add a comment |
To replace the content of the file with the output of echo
(like the >
shell redirection operator).
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo
To write into the file (at the beginning, though you can use seek
to output at different offsets) without truncating (like the 1<>
Bourne shell operator):
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo conv=notrunc
To append to the file (like >>
), with GNU dd
:
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo oflag=append conv=notrunc
See also GNU dd
's conv=excl
to avoid clobbering an existing file (like with set -o noclobber
in POSIX shells) and conv=nocreat
for the opposite (only update an existing file).
clever! this alleviates the need to doecho test | sudo tee /tmp/foo >/dev/null
to discard the output.
– Adam Katz
Jan 14 '15 at 23:52
2
I may have to take that back;dd
is unreliable for that unless you're using obscure GNU-only optionsiflag=fullblock oflag=fullblock
, which remove the elegance of this answer. I'll stick withtee
.
– Adam Katz
Jan 16 '15 at 6:32
5
dd is reliable with the non-obscure bs=1
– umeboshi
Jan 25 '15 at 3:50
2
@umeboshi But reliable only if you're experienced enough to know exactly what you're doing. Fordd
can be fairly dangerous (if not to say: devastating) if only a slight mistake was made. So for new users, I'd rather recommend thetee
method to be on the safe shore.
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:38
1
@AdamKatz, in the case ofdd of=file
alone (withoutcount
/skip
...), it is reliable.iflag=fullblock
is not needed because heredd
writes on output what it has read on input. It doesn't matter if it was not full blocks.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Sep 12 '17 at 11:30
add a comment |
To replace the content of the file with the output of echo
(like the >
shell redirection operator).
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo
To write into the file (at the beginning, though you can use seek
to output at different offsets) without truncating (like the 1<>
Bourne shell operator):
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo conv=notrunc
To append to the file (like >>
), with GNU dd
:
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo oflag=append conv=notrunc
See also GNU dd
's conv=excl
to avoid clobbering an existing file (like with set -o noclobber
in POSIX shells) and conv=nocreat
for the opposite (only update an existing file).
To replace the content of the file with the output of echo
(like the >
shell redirection operator).
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo
To write into the file (at the beginning, though you can use seek
to output at different offsets) without truncating (like the 1<>
Bourne shell operator):
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo conv=notrunc
To append to the file (like >>
), with GNU dd
:
echo test | sudo dd of=/tmp/foo oflag=append conv=notrunc
See also GNU dd
's conv=excl
to avoid clobbering an existing file (like with set -o noclobber
in POSIX shells) and conv=nocreat
for the opposite (only update an existing file).
edited Mar 13 '18 at 13:20
Stéphane Chazelas
301k55564916
301k55564916
answered Sep 3 '10 at 4:19
Chris JepewayChris Jepeway
26122
26122
clever! this alleviates the need to doecho test | sudo tee /tmp/foo >/dev/null
to discard the output.
– Adam Katz
Jan 14 '15 at 23:52
2
I may have to take that back;dd
is unreliable for that unless you're using obscure GNU-only optionsiflag=fullblock oflag=fullblock
, which remove the elegance of this answer. I'll stick withtee
.
– Adam Katz
Jan 16 '15 at 6:32
5
dd is reliable with the non-obscure bs=1
– umeboshi
Jan 25 '15 at 3:50
2
@umeboshi But reliable only if you're experienced enough to know exactly what you're doing. Fordd
can be fairly dangerous (if not to say: devastating) if only a slight mistake was made. So for new users, I'd rather recommend thetee
method to be on the safe shore.
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:38
1
@AdamKatz, in the case ofdd of=file
alone (withoutcount
/skip
...), it is reliable.iflag=fullblock
is not needed because heredd
writes on output what it has read on input. It doesn't matter if it was not full blocks.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Sep 12 '17 at 11:30
add a comment |
clever! this alleviates the need to doecho test | sudo tee /tmp/foo >/dev/null
to discard the output.
– Adam Katz
Jan 14 '15 at 23:52
2
I may have to take that back;dd
is unreliable for that unless you're using obscure GNU-only optionsiflag=fullblock oflag=fullblock
, which remove the elegance of this answer. I'll stick withtee
.
– Adam Katz
Jan 16 '15 at 6:32
5
dd is reliable with the non-obscure bs=1
– umeboshi
Jan 25 '15 at 3:50
2
@umeboshi But reliable only if you're experienced enough to know exactly what you're doing. Fordd
can be fairly dangerous (if not to say: devastating) if only a slight mistake was made. So for new users, I'd rather recommend thetee
method to be on the safe shore.
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:38
1
@AdamKatz, in the case ofdd of=file
alone (withoutcount
/skip
...), it is reliable.iflag=fullblock
is not needed because heredd
writes on output what it has read on input. It doesn't matter if it was not full blocks.
– Stéphane Chazelas
Sep 12 '17 at 11:30
clever! this alleviates the need to do
echo test | sudo tee /tmp/foo >/dev/null
to discard the output.– Adam Katz
Jan 14 '15 at 23:52
clever! this alleviates the need to do
echo test | sudo tee /tmp/foo >/dev/null
to discard the output.– Adam Katz
Jan 14 '15 at 23:52
2
2
I may have to take that back;
dd
is unreliable for that unless you're using obscure GNU-only options iflag=fullblock oflag=fullblock
, which remove the elegance of this answer. I'll stick with tee
.– Adam Katz
Jan 16 '15 at 6:32
I may have to take that back;
dd
is unreliable for that unless you're using obscure GNU-only options iflag=fullblock oflag=fullblock
, which remove the elegance of this answer. I'll stick with tee
.– Adam Katz
Jan 16 '15 at 6:32
5
5
dd is reliable with the non-obscure bs=1
– umeboshi
Jan 25 '15 at 3:50
dd is reliable with the non-obscure bs=1
– umeboshi
Jan 25 '15 at 3:50
2
2
@umeboshi But reliable only if you're experienced enough to know exactly what you're doing. For
dd
can be fairly dangerous (if not to say: devastating) if only a slight mistake was made. So for new users, I'd rather recommend the tee
method to be on the safe shore.– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:38
@umeboshi But reliable only if you're experienced enough to know exactly what you're doing. For
dd
can be fairly dangerous (if not to say: devastating) if only a slight mistake was made. So for new users, I'd rather recommend the tee
method to be on the safe shore.– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:38
1
1
@AdamKatz, in the case of
dd of=file
alone (without count
/skip
...), it is reliable. iflag=fullblock
is not needed because here dd
writes on output what it has read on input. It doesn't matter if it was not full blocks.– Stéphane Chazelas
Sep 12 '17 at 11:30
@AdamKatz, in the case of
dd of=file
alone (without count
/skip
...), it is reliable. iflag=fullblock
is not needed because here dd
writes on output what it has read on input. It doesn't matter if it was not full blocks.– Stéphane Chazelas
Sep 12 '17 at 11:30
add a comment |
tee
is probably the best choice, but depending on your situation something like this may be enough:
sudo sh -c 'echo test > /tmp/foo'
1
3 problems:eval
instead of a simplesh -c
; -i, which will change your working dir; running the whole command as root, which might change it's behaviour or may introduce an unnecessary risk. why did this ever get an upvote?
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 10:38
4
you didn't, but it is misleading, generally bad and maybe even dangerous.
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 20:24
add a comment |
tee
is probably the best choice, but depending on your situation something like this may be enough:
sudo sh -c 'echo test > /tmp/foo'
1
3 problems:eval
instead of a simplesh -c
; -i, which will change your working dir; running the whole command as root, which might change it's behaviour or may introduce an unnecessary risk. why did this ever get an upvote?
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 10:38
4
you didn't, but it is misleading, generally bad and maybe even dangerous.
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 20:24
add a comment |
tee
is probably the best choice, but depending on your situation something like this may be enough:
sudo sh -c 'echo test > /tmp/foo'
tee
is probably the best choice, but depending on your situation something like this may be enough:
sudo sh -c 'echo test > /tmp/foo'
edited Jan 20 '18 at 8:41
answered Aug 31 '10 at 7:28
phunehehephunehehe
12.2k1782138
12.2k1782138
1
3 problems:eval
instead of a simplesh -c
; -i, which will change your working dir; running the whole command as root, which might change it's behaviour or may introduce an unnecessary risk. why did this ever get an upvote?
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 10:38
4
you didn't, but it is misleading, generally bad and maybe even dangerous.
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 20:24
add a comment |
1
3 problems:eval
instead of a simplesh -c
; -i, which will change your working dir; running the whole command as root, which might change it's behaviour or may introduce an unnecessary risk. why did this ever get an upvote?
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 10:38
4
you didn't, but it is misleading, generally bad and maybe even dangerous.
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 20:24
1
1
3 problems:
eval
instead of a simple sh -c
; -i, which will change your working dir; running the whole command as root, which might change it's behaviour or may introduce an unnecessary risk. why did this ever get an upvote?– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 10:38
3 problems:
eval
instead of a simple sh -c
; -i, which will change your working dir; running the whole command as root, which might change it's behaviour or may introduce an unnecessary risk. why did this ever get an upvote?– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 10:38
4
4
you didn't, but it is misleading, generally bad and maybe even dangerous.
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 20:24
you didn't, but it is misleading, generally bad and maybe even dangerous.
– user601
Aug 31 '10 at 20:24
add a comment |
While I agree, that | sudo tee
is the canonical way, sometimes sed (here assuming GNU sed
) may work:
cat sudotest
line 1
sudo sed -i '1iitest' sudotest && cat sudotest
itest
line 1
sudo sed -i '$aatest' sudotest && cat sudotest
itest
line 1
atest
-i
modifies the file in place. 1i
means insert before line 1. $a
means append after last line.
Or copy to xclipboard:
somecommand | xclip
sudo gedit sudotest
move cursor to desired place, click middle mouse button to insert, save
1
This is worded like an Ancient Chinese riddle. Can't see to understand how this got so many upvotes. (hrmph)
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:36
@syntaxerror: Sir, I'm sorry, I'm not a native English speaker. If you specify what is unclear to you, I could try to improve my answer. Compared with 65 upvotes for Gert, 4 doesn't seem to be that many upvotes, either, don't you think?
– user unknown
Jan 30 '16 at 1:35
Well I would be pretty satisfied with 4 :-D Your English is not bad at all. It's just worded in a kind of terse techie nerdspeak. I must guess you're a coder. Coders amongst each other will understand themselves perfectly that way, but a non-coder must think it's worded like...as said.
– syntaxerror
Jan 31 '16 at 20:22
Note thatsed -i
does not actually modify the file in place - it creates a temporary file and renames it on exiting. So you won't be able to do something liketail -f ...
on the original file and see the output usingsed -i ...
while the pipeline is running
– Andrew Henle
Mar 14 '18 at 10:24
@AndrewHenle: Yes, since the size may be increased or shrinked, and since that's probably the case for most sed invocations, and you can't even - afaik - write to the same location on SSDs it's only a pseudo 'in place' operation. As a non native english speaker, may I ask for a brief expression, which isn't so likely misinterpreted? Just-i creates a new file of same name
or is there something more compact? I guess I likein place
, because it explains thei
. The gnu-sed manpage calls it in place too and the long flag is--in-place
.
– user unknown
Mar 14 '18 at 10:30
add a comment |
While I agree, that | sudo tee
is the canonical way, sometimes sed (here assuming GNU sed
) may work:
cat sudotest
line 1
sudo sed -i '1iitest' sudotest && cat sudotest
itest
line 1
sudo sed -i '$aatest' sudotest && cat sudotest
itest
line 1
atest
-i
modifies the file in place. 1i
means insert before line 1. $a
means append after last line.
Or copy to xclipboard:
somecommand | xclip
sudo gedit sudotest
move cursor to desired place, click middle mouse button to insert, save
1
This is worded like an Ancient Chinese riddle. Can't see to understand how this got so many upvotes. (hrmph)
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:36
@syntaxerror: Sir, I'm sorry, I'm not a native English speaker. If you specify what is unclear to you, I could try to improve my answer. Compared with 65 upvotes for Gert, 4 doesn't seem to be that many upvotes, either, don't you think?
– user unknown
Jan 30 '16 at 1:35
Well I would be pretty satisfied with 4 :-D Your English is not bad at all. It's just worded in a kind of terse techie nerdspeak. I must guess you're a coder. Coders amongst each other will understand themselves perfectly that way, but a non-coder must think it's worded like...as said.
– syntaxerror
Jan 31 '16 at 20:22
Note thatsed -i
does not actually modify the file in place - it creates a temporary file and renames it on exiting. So you won't be able to do something liketail -f ...
on the original file and see the output usingsed -i ...
while the pipeline is running
– Andrew Henle
Mar 14 '18 at 10:24
@AndrewHenle: Yes, since the size may be increased or shrinked, and since that's probably the case for most sed invocations, and you can't even - afaik - write to the same location on SSDs it's only a pseudo 'in place' operation. As a non native english speaker, may I ask for a brief expression, which isn't so likely misinterpreted? Just-i creates a new file of same name
or is there something more compact? I guess I likein place
, because it explains thei
. The gnu-sed manpage calls it in place too and the long flag is--in-place
.
– user unknown
Mar 14 '18 at 10:30
add a comment |
While I agree, that | sudo tee
is the canonical way, sometimes sed (here assuming GNU sed
) may work:
cat sudotest
line 1
sudo sed -i '1iitest' sudotest && cat sudotest
itest
line 1
sudo sed -i '$aatest' sudotest && cat sudotest
itest
line 1
atest
-i
modifies the file in place. 1i
means insert before line 1. $a
means append after last line.
Or copy to xclipboard:
somecommand | xclip
sudo gedit sudotest
move cursor to desired place, click middle mouse button to insert, save
While I agree, that | sudo tee
is the canonical way, sometimes sed (here assuming GNU sed
) may work:
cat sudotest
line 1
sudo sed -i '1iitest' sudotest && cat sudotest
itest
line 1
sudo sed -i '$aatest' sudotest && cat sudotest
itest
line 1
atest
-i
modifies the file in place. 1i
means insert before line 1. $a
means append after last line.
Or copy to xclipboard:
somecommand | xclip
sudo gedit sudotest
move cursor to desired place, click middle mouse button to insert, save
edited Sep 12 '17 at 21:24
answered Jul 19 '11 at 2:11
user unknownuser unknown
7,23312248
7,23312248
1
This is worded like an Ancient Chinese riddle. Can't see to understand how this got so many upvotes. (hrmph)
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:36
@syntaxerror: Sir, I'm sorry, I'm not a native English speaker. If you specify what is unclear to you, I could try to improve my answer. Compared with 65 upvotes for Gert, 4 doesn't seem to be that many upvotes, either, don't you think?
– user unknown
Jan 30 '16 at 1:35
Well I would be pretty satisfied with 4 :-D Your English is not bad at all. It's just worded in a kind of terse techie nerdspeak. I must guess you're a coder. Coders amongst each other will understand themselves perfectly that way, but a non-coder must think it's worded like...as said.
– syntaxerror
Jan 31 '16 at 20:22
Note thatsed -i
does not actually modify the file in place - it creates a temporary file and renames it on exiting. So you won't be able to do something liketail -f ...
on the original file and see the output usingsed -i ...
while the pipeline is running
– Andrew Henle
Mar 14 '18 at 10:24
@AndrewHenle: Yes, since the size may be increased or shrinked, and since that's probably the case for most sed invocations, and you can't even - afaik - write to the same location on SSDs it's only a pseudo 'in place' operation. As a non native english speaker, may I ask for a brief expression, which isn't so likely misinterpreted? Just-i creates a new file of same name
or is there something more compact? I guess I likein place
, because it explains thei
. The gnu-sed manpage calls it in place too and the long flag is--in-place
.
– user unknown
Mar 14 '18 at 10:30
add a comment |
1
This is worded like an Ancient Chinese riddle. Can't see to understand how this got so many upvotes. (hrmph)
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:36
@syntaxerror: Sir, I'm sorry, I'm not a native English speaker. If you specify what is unclear to you, I could try to improve my answer. Compared with 65 upvotes for Gert, 4 doesn't seem to be that many upvotes, either, don't you think?
– user unknown
Jan 30 '16 at 1:35
Well I would be pretty satisfied with 4 :-D Your English is not bad at all. It's just worded in a kind of terse techie nerdspeak. I must guess you're a coder. Coders amongst each other will understand themselves perfectly that way, but a non-coder must think it's worded like...as said.
– syntaxerror
Jan 31 '16 at 20:22
Note thatsed -i
does not actually modify the file in place - it creates a temporary file and renames it on exiting. So you won't be able to do something liketail -f ...
on the original file and see the output usingsed -i ...
while the pipeline is running
– Andrew Henle
Mar 14 '18 at 10:24
@AndrewHenle: Yes, since the size may be increased or shrinked, and since that's probably the case for most sed invocations, and you can't even - afaik - write to the same location on SSDs it's only a pseudo 'in place' operation. As a non native english speaker, may I ask for a brief expression, which isn't so likely misinterpreted? Just-i creates a new file of same name
or is there something more compact? I guess I likein place
, because it explains thei
. The gnu-sed manpage calls it in place too and the long flag is--in-place
.
– user unknown
Mar 14 '18 at 10:30
1
1
This is worded like an Ancient Chinese riddle. Can't see to understand how this got so many upvotes. (hrmph)
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:36
This is worded like an Ancient Chinese riddle. Can't see to understand how this got so many upvotes. (hrmph)
– syntaxerror
Jan 29 '16 at 17:36
@syntaxerror: Sir, I'm sorry, I'm not a native English speaker. If you specify what is unclear to you, I could try to improve my answer. Compared with 65 upvotes for Gert, 4 doesn't seem to be that many upvotes, either, don't you think?
– user unknown
Jan 30 '16 at 1:35
@syntaxerror: Sir, I'm sorry, I'm not a native English speaker. If you specify what is unclear to you, I could try to improve my answer. Compared with 65 upvotes for Gert, 4 doesn't seem to be that many upvotes, either, don't you think?
– user unknown
Jan 30 '16 at 1:35
Well I would be pretty satisfied with 4 :-D Your English is not bad at all. It's just worded in a kind of terse techie nerdspeak. I must guess you're a coder. Coders amongst each other will understand themselves perfectly that way, but a non-coder must think it's worded like...as said.
– syntaxerror
Jan 31 '16 at 20:22
Well I would be pretty satisfied with 4 :-D Your English is not bad at all. It's just worded in a kind of terse techie nerdspeak. I must guess you're a coder. Coders amongst each other will understand themselves perfectly that way, but a non-coder must think it's worded like...as said.
– syntaxerror
Jan 31 '16 at 20:22
Note that
sed -i
does not actually modify the file in place - it creates a temporary file and renames it on exiting. So you won't be able to do something like tail -f ...
on the original file and see the output using sed -i ...
while the pipeline is running– Andrew Henle
Mar 14 '18 at 10:24
Note that
sed -i
does not actually modify the file in place - it creates a temporary file and renames it on exiting. So you won't be able to do something like tail -f ...
on the original file and see the output using sed -i ...
while the pipeline is running– Andrew Henle
Mar 14 '18 at 10:24
@AndrewHenle: Yes, since the size may be increased or shrinked, and since that's probably the case for most sed invocations, and you can't even - afaik - write to the same location on SSDs it's only a pseudo 'in place' operation. As a non native english speaker, may I ask for a brief expression, which isn't so likely misinterpreted? Just
-i creates a new file of same name
or is there something more compact? I guess I like in place
, because it explains the i
. The gnu-sed manpage calls it in place too and the long flag is --in-place
.– user unknown
Mar 14 '18 at 10:30
@AndrewHenle: Yes, since the size may be increased or shrinked, and since that's probably the case for most sed invocations, and you can't even - afaik - write to the same location on SSDs it's only a pseudo 'in place' operation. As a non native english speaker, may I ask for a brief expression, which isn't so likely misinterpreted? Just
-i creates a new file of same name
or is there something more compact? I guess I like in place
, because it explains the i
. The gnu-sed manpage calls it in place too and the long flag is --in-place
.– user unknown
Mar 14 '18 at 10:30
add a comment |
I have been kicking around in the back of my mind ideas for a similar problem, and came up with the following solutions:
sudo uncat
whereuncat
is a program that reads standard input and writes it to the file named on the command line, but I haven't writtenuncat
yet.sudocat
the variant ofsudoedit
that I haven't written yet that does a cleanersudo cat
orsudo uncat
.
or this little trick of using
sudoedit
with an EDITOR that is a shell script
#!/bin/sh
# uncat
cat > "$1"
which can be invoked as either
|sudo ./uncat file
or| EDITOR=./uncat sudoedit
but that has interesting side-effects.
cat
takes a list of files to concatinate, therefore uncat should take a list of files to un concatinate to. It would have to use magic to decide how much to put in each file. Alternative name includedog
,to-file
,redirect
.
– ctrl-alt-delor
Apr 15 '15 at 14:51
I can't think of any reason why I would wantuncat
when I havetee
.
– Wildcard
Sep 29 '15 at 9:26
1
Well,tee
has the trivial drawback that it writes its stdin to its stdout — which is trivially mitigated by redirecting the stdout to/dev/null
. Other alternatives includedd of=/tmp/foo
(mentioned in another answer), which writes status information to stderr, andcp /dev/stdin /tmp/foo
.
– Scott
Feb 17 '16 at 14:44
add a comment |
I have been kicking around in the back of my mind ideas for a similar problem, and came up with the following solutions:
sudo uncat
whereuncat
is a program that reads standard input and writes it to the file named on the command line, but I haven't writtenuncat
yet.sudocat
the variant ofsudoedit
that I haven't written yet that does a cleanersudo cat
orsudo uncat
.
or this little trick of using
sudoedit
with an EDITOR that is a shell script
#!/bin/sh
# uncat
cat > "$1"
which can be invoked as either
|sudo ./uncat file
or| EDITOR=./uncat sudoedit
but that has interesting side-effects.
cat
takes a list of files to concatinate, therefore uncat should take a list of files to un concatinate to. It would have to use magic to decide how much to put in each file. Alternative name includedog
,to-file
,redirect
.
– ctrl-alt-delor
Apr 15 '15 at 14:51
I can't think of any reason why I would wantuncat
when I havetee
.
– Wildcard
Sep 29 '15 at 9:26
1
Well,tee
has the trivial drawback that it writes its stdin to its stdout — which is trivially mitigated by redirecting the stdout to/dev/null
. Other alternatives includedd of=/tmp/foo
(mentioned in another answer), which writes status information to stderr, andcp /dev/stdin /tmp/foo
.
– Scott
Feb 17 '16 at 14:44
add a comment |
I have been kicking around in the back of my mind ideas for a similar problem, and came up with the following solutions:
sudo uncat
whereuncat
is a program that reads standard input and writes it to the file named on the command line, but I haven't writtenuncat
yet.sudocat
the variant ofsudoedit
that I haven't written yet that does a cleanersudo cat
orsudo uncat
.
or this little trick of using
sudoedit
with an EDITOR that is a shell script
#!/bin/sh
# uncat
cat > "$1"
which can be invoked as either
|sudo ./uncat file
or| EDITOR=./uncat sudoedit
but that has interesting side-effects.
I have been kicking around in the back of my mind ideas for a similar problem, and came up with the following solutions:
sudo uncat
whereuncat
is a program that reads standard input and writes it to the file named on the command line, but I haven't writtenuncat
yet.sudocat
the variant ofsudoedit
that I haven't written yet that does a cleanersudo cat
orsudo uncat
.
or this little trick of using
sudoedit
with an EDITOR that is a shell script
#!/bin/sh
# uncat
cat > "$1"
which can be invoked as either
|sudo ./uncat file
or| EDITOR=./uncat sudoedit
but that has interesting side-effects.
edited Sep 12 '17 at 11:44
Stéphane Chazelas
301k55564916
301k55564916
answered Nov 20 '13 at 2:16
hildredhildred
4,73622137
4,73622137
cat
takes a list of files to concatinate, therefore uncat should take a list of files to un concatinate to. It would have to use magic to decide how much to put in each file. Alternative name includedog
,to-file
,redirect
.
– ctrl-alt-delor
Apr 15 '15 at 14:51
I can't think of any reason why I would wantuncat
when I havetee
.
– Wildcard
Sep 29 '15 at 9:26
1
Well,tee
has the trivial drawback that it writes its stdin to its stdout — which is trivially mitigated by redirecting the stdout to/dev/null
. Other alternatives includedd of=/tmp/foo
(mentioned in another answer), which writes status information to stderr, andcp /dev/stdin /tmp/foo
.
– Scott
Feb 17 '16 at 14:44
add a comment |
cat
takes a list of files to concatinate, therefore uncat should take a list of files to un concatinate to. It would have to use magic to decide how much to put in each file. Alternative name includedog
,to-file
,redirect
.
– ctrl-alt-delor
Apr 15 '15 at 14:51
I can't think of any reason why I would wantuncat
when I havetee
.
– Wildcard
Sep 29 '15 at 9:26
1
Well,tee
has the trivial drawback that it writes its stdin to its stdout — which is trivially mitigated by redirecting the stdout to/dev/null
. Other alternatives includedd of=/tmp/foo
(mentioned in another answer), which writes status information to stderr, andcp /dev/stdin /tmp/foo
.
– Scott
Feb 17 '16 at 14:44
cat
takes a list of files to concatinate, therefore uncat should take a list of files to un concatinate to. It would have to use magic to decide how much to put in each file. Alternative name include dog
, to-file
, redirect
.– ctrl-alt-delor
Apr 15 '15 at 14:51
cat
takes a list of files to concatinate, therefore uncat should take a list of files to un concatinate to. It would have to use magic to decide how much to put in each file. Alternative name include dog
, to-file
, redirect
.– ctrl-alt-delor
Apr 15 '15 at 14:51
I can't think of any reason why I would want
uncat
when I have tee
.– Wildcard
Sep 29 '15 at 9:26
I can't think of any reason why I would want
uncat
when I have tee
.– Wildcard
Sep 29 '15 at 9:26
1
1
Well,
tee
has the trivial drawback that it writes its stdin to its stdout — which is trivially mitigated by redirecting the stdout to /dev/null
. Other alternatives include dd of=/tmp/foo
(mentioned in another answer), which writes status information to stderr, and cp /dev/stdin /tmp/foo
.– Scott
Feb 17 '16 at 14:44
Well,
tee
has the trivial drawback that it writes its stdin to its stdout — which is trivially mitigated by redirecting the stdout to /dev/null
. Other alternatives include dd of=/tmp/foo
(mentioned in another answer), which writes status information to stderr, and cp /dev/stdin /tmp/foo
.– Scott
Feb 17 '16 at 14:44
add a comment |
Use sponge from the moreutils package. It has the advantage that it does not write to stdout.
echo test | sudo sponge /tmp/foo
Use the -a option to append to a file instead of overwriting it.
1
I'm not sure what advantage not writing to stdout presents, but you could just redirect the output to/dev/null
if it were an issue
– Michael Mrozek♦
Dec 18 '16 at 4:41
1
Of course I can redirect to /dev/null, but the command is easier to read and type without the redirection. The advantage of not writing to stdout is that my terminal is not filled with rubbish.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:48
1
I would not install a package to spare a redirection, but I regularly use sponge, so it is already there.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:50
add a comment |
Use sponge from the moreutils package. It has the advantage that it does not write to stdout.
echo test | sudo sponge /tmp/foo
Use the -a option to append to a file instead of overwriting it.
1
I'm not sure what advantage not writing to stdout presents, but you could just redirect the output to/dev/null
if it were an issue
– Michael Mrozek♦
Dec 18 '16 at 4:41
1
Of course I can redirect to /dev/null, but the command is easier to read and type without the redirection. The advantage of not writing to stdout is that my terminal is not filled with rubbish.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:48
1
I would not install a package to spare a redirection, but I regularly use sponge, so it is already there.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:50
add a comment |
Use sponge from the moreutils package. It has the advantage that it does not write to stdout.
echo test | sudo sponge /tmp/foo
Use the -a option to append to a file instead of overwriting it.
Use sponge from the moreutils package. It has the advantage that it does not write to stdout.
echo test | sudo sponge /tmp/foo
Use the -a option to append to a file instead of overwriting it.
answered Dec 17 '16 at 21:46
Hontvári LeventeHontvári Levente
42147
42147
1
I'm not sure what advantage not writing to stdout presents, but you could just redirect the output to/dev/null
if it were an issue
– Michael Mrozek♦
Dec 18 '16 at 4:41
1
Of course I can redirect to /dev/null, but the command is easier to read and type without the redirection. The advantage of not writing to stdout is that my terminal is not filled with rubbish.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:48
1
I would not install a package to spare a redirection, but I regularly use sponge, so it is already there.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:50
add a comment |
1
I'm not sure what advantage not writing to stdout presents, but you could just redirect the output to/dev/null
if it were an issue
– Michael Mrozek♦
Dec 18 '16 at 4:41
1
Of course I can redirect to /dev/null, but the command is easier to read and type without the redirection. The advantage of not writing to stdout is that my terminal is not filled with rubbish.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:48
1
I would not install a package to spare a redirection, but I regularly use sponge, so it is already there.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:50
1
1
I'm not sure what advantage not writing to stdout presents, but you could just redirect the output to
/dev/null
if it were an issue– Michael Mrozek♦
Dec 18 '16 at 4:41
I'm not sure what advantage not writing to stdout presents, but you could just redirect the output to
/dev/null
if it were an issue– Michael Mrozek♦
Dec 18 '16 at 4:41
1
1
Of course I can redirect to /dev/null, but the command is easier to read and type without the redirection. The advantage of not writing to stdout is that my terminal is not filled with rubbish.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:48
Of course I can redirect to /dev/null, but the command is easier to read and type without the redirection. The advantage of not writing to stdout is that my terminal is not filled with rubbish.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:48
1
1
I would not install a package to spare a redirection, but I regularly use sponge, so it is already there.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:50
I would not install a package to spare a redirection, but I regularly use sponge, so it is already there.
– Hontvári Levente
Dec 18 '16 at 22:50
add a comment |
The error comes from the order in which the shell does things.
The redirection is handled before the shell even executes sudo
, and is therefore done with the permissions of the user that you are currently working as. Since you don't have write permissions to create/truncate the target of the redirection, you get a permission denied
error from the shell.
The solution is to guarantee that the output file is created under the identity given to you by sudo
, e.g. with tee
:
$ generate_output | sudo tee target_file
add a comment |
The error comes from the order in which the shell does things.
The redirection is handled before the shell even executes sudo
, and is therefore done with the permissions of the user that you are currently working as. Since you don't have write permissions to create/truncate the target of the redirection, you get a permission denied
error from the shell.
The solution is to guarantee that the output file is created under the identity given to you by sudo
, e.g. with tee
:
$ generate_output | sudo tee target_file
add a comment |
The error comes from the order in which the shell does things.
The redirection is handled before the shell even executes sudo
, and is therefore done with the permissions of the user that you are currently working as. Since you don't have write permissions to create/truncate the target of the redirection, you get a permission denied
error from the shell.
The solution is to guarantee that the output file is created under the identity given to you by sudo
, e.g. with tee
:
$ generate_output | sudo tee target_file
The error comes from the order in which the shell does things.
The redirection is handled before the shell even executes sudo
, and is therefore done with the permissions of the user that you are currently working as. Since you don't have write permissions to create/truncate the target of the redirection, you get a permission denied
error from the shell.
The solution is to guarantee that the output file is created under the identity given to you by sudo
, e.g. with tee
:
$ generate_output | sudo tee target_file
answered Feb 4 '17 at 9:36
KusalanandaKusalananda
124k16234385
124k16234385
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.
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%2f1416%2fredirecting-stdout-to-a-file-you-dont-have-write-permission-on%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
2
Answer for a similar question from StackOverflow stackoverflow.com/questions/82256/…
– Cristian Ciupitu
Sep 3 '10 at 11:22
how can u dont have permission to a file you created yourself in tmp ? is it becuase of umask ?
– k961
Feb 16 '15 at 4:40
@k961 I used
chown
to change the owner; it was just an example– Michael Mrozek♦
Feb 16 '15 at 6:56