fish shell : exec format error
On an Ubuntu ($ uname -a
: Linux kumanaku 4.15.0-43-generic #46-Ubuntu SMP Thu Dec 6 14:45:28 UTC 2018 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
), I just installed fish ($ fish --version
: fish, version 2.7.1
) using the following commands :
sudo apt-add-repository ppa:fish-shell/release-2
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install fish
chsh -s /usr/bin/fish
echo /usr/bin/fish | sudo tee -a /etc/shells
I can launch fish
and use it but when I launch a simple shell file like :
echo "something"
I got the following message :
$ ./myscript.sh
Failed to execute process './myscript.sh'. Reason:
exec: Exec format error
The file './myscript.sh' is marked as an executable but could not be run by the operating system.
There's no shebang in my script. If I add #!/usr/bin/env fish
, everything's ok (i.e. the script is successfully launched) but I'd like to avoid such a line to keep my script compatible with different shells.
Any idea ?
shell-script shell fish
add a comment |
On an Ubuntu ($ uname -a
: Linux kumanaku 4.15.0-43-generic #46-Ubuntu SMP Thu Dec 6 14:45:28 UTC 2018 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
), I just installed fish ($ fish --version
: fish, version 2.7.1
) using the following commands :
sudo apt-add-repository ppa:fish-shell/release-2
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install fish
chsh -s /usr/bin/fish
echo /usr/bin/fish | sudo tee -a /etc/shells
I can launch fish
and use it but when I launch a simple shell file like :
echo "something"
I got the following message :
$ ./myscript.sh
Failed to execute process './myscript.sh'. Reason:
exec: Exec format error
The file './myscript.sh' is marked as an executable but could not be run by the operating system.
There's no shebang in my script. If I add #!/usr/bin/env fish
, everything's ok (i.e. the script is successfully launched) but I'd like to avoid such a line to keep my script compatible with different shells.
Any idea ?
shell-script shell fish
1
Related: Which shell interpreter runs a script with no shebang?
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
1
(the takeaway is that fish does not attempt POSIX compatibility there, so launching scripts from fish requires that execvp succeeds)
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
add a comment |
On an Ubuntu ($ uname -a
: Linux kumanaku 4.15.0-43-generic #46-Ubuntu SMP Thu Dec 6 14:45:28 UTC 2018 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
), I just installed fish ($ fish --version
: fish, version 2.7.1
) using the following commands :
sudo apt-add-repository ppa:fish-shell/release-2
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install fish
chsh -s /usr/bin/fish
echo /usr/bin/fish | sudo tee -a /etc/shells
I can launch fish
and use it but when I launch a simple shell file like :
echo "something"
I got the following message :
$ ./myscript.sh
Failed to execute process './myscript.sh'. Reason:
exec: Exec format error
The file './myscript.sh' is marked as an executable but could not be run by the operating system.
There's no shebang in my script. If I add #!/usr/bin/env fish
, everything's ok (i.e. the script is successfully launched) but I'd like to avoid such a line to keep my script compatible with different shells.
Any idea ?
shell-script shell fish
On an Ubuntu ($ uname -a
: Linux kumanaku 4.15.0-43-generic #46-Ubuntu SMP Thu Dec 6 14:45:28 UTC 2018 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
), I just installed fish ($ fish --version
: fish, version 2.7.1
) using the following commands :
sudo apt-add-repository ppa:fish-shell/release-2
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install fish
chsh -s /usr/bin/fish
echo /usr/bin/fish | sudo tee -a /etc/shells
I can launch fish
and use it but when I launch a simple shell file like :
echo "something"
I got the following message :
$ ./myscript.sh
Failed to execute process './myscript.sh'. Reason:
exec: Exec format error
The file './myscript.sh' is marked as an executable but could not be run by the operating system.
There's no shebang in my script. If I add #!/usr/bin/env fish
, everything's ok (i.e. the script is successfully launched) but I'd like to avoid such a line to keep my script compatible with different shells.
Any idea ?
shell-script shell fish
shell-script shell fish
edited 3 hours ago
Rui F Ribeiro
38.9k1479129
38.9k1479129
asked 5 hours ago
suizokukan
1184
1184
1
Related: Which shell interpreter runs a script with no shebang?
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
1
(the takeaway is that fish does not attempt POSIX compatibility there, so launching scripts from fish requires that execvp succeeds)
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Related: Which shell interpreter runs a script with no shebang?
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
1
(the takeaway is that fish does not attempt POSIX compatibility there, so launching scripts from fish requires that execvp succeeds)
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
1
1
Related: Which shell interpreter runs a script with no shebang?
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
Related: Which shell interpreter runs a script with no shebang?
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
1
1
(the takeaway is that fish does not attempt POSIX compatibility there, so launching scripts from fish requires that execvp succeeds)
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
(the takeaway is that fish does not attempt POSIX compatibility there, so launching scripts from fish requires that execvp succeeds)
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
You need to have a shebang in order to execute a script by referencing its path. Otherwise, the operating system will attempt to execute it, but will fail because it's not a binary executable file.
If you don't want to use a shebang you need to specify what should execute the script. In your case, it should be fish
.
fish myscript.sh
Ok, so I'm looking for a 'universal' shebang. What about#!/usr/bin/env bash
(see stackoverflow.com/questions/10376206/…) ? This line allows my script to be launched directly withfish
.
– suizokukan
5 hours ago
1
@suizokukan:#!/usr/bin/env bash
is only universal if every system you want to execute the script hasbash
installed. If you want portability, write your script to be compatible with POSIX standards. Then most shells will be able to execute it without issue (as most common shells are POSIX compliant).
– Peschke
4 hours ago
2
POSIX scripts don't have the shebang, and since fish isn't POSIX-compatible it can't call them anyway (the premise of this question), so I'm not sure that helps
– Michael Homer
4 hours ago
1
@MichaelHomer: POSIX scripts can have a shebang if you want them to. Since OP later asked for a ‘universal’ shebang,#!/bin/sh
would be the way to go in my opinion.
– Peschke
2 hours ago
add a comment |
You need a shebang line if the executable file cannot be run natively by the kernel. The kernel can only run machine code in a specific format (ELF on most Unix variants), or sometimes other formats (e.g. on Linux you can register executable formats through binfmt_misc). If the executable file needs an interpreter then the kernel needs to know which interpreter to call. That's what the shebang line is for.
If your script is in fish syntax, its first line must be
#!/usr/bin/env fish
(You can use the absolute path instead, but then you'll have to modify the script if you want to run it on a machine where the fish
executable is in a different location, e.g. /usr/bin/fish
vs /usr/local/bin/fish
.)
If your script is in sh syntax, use
#!/bin/sh
(All modern Unix systems have a POSIX sh at /bin/sh
so you don't need env
.)
If your script is in bash syntax (which is sh plus some bash-specific extensions), use
#!/usr/bin/env bash
On Linux, in practice, #!/bin/bash
will also work.
All of this is independent of which shell you're calling the script from. All that matters is what language the script is written in.
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%2f491419%2ffish-shell-exec-format-error%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You need to have a shebang in order to execute a script by referencing its path. Otherwise, the operating system will attempt to execute it, but will fail because it's not a binary executable file.
If you don't want to use a shebang you need to specify what should execute the script. In your case, it should be fish
.
fish myscript.sh
Ok, so I'm looking for a 'universal' shebang. What about#!/usr/bin/env bash
(see stackoverflow.com/questions/10376206/…) ? This line allows my script to be launched directly withfish
.
– suizokukan
5 hours ago
1
@suizokukan:#!/usr/bin/env bash
is only universal if every system you want to execute the script hasbash
installed. If you want portability, write your script to be compatible with POSIX standards. Then most shells will be able to execute it without issue (as most common shells are POSIX compliant).
– Peschke
4 hours ago
2
POSIX scripts don't have the shebang, and since fish isn't POSIX-compatible it can't call them anyway (the premise of this question), so I'm not sure that helps
– Michael Homer
4 hours ago
1
@MichaelHomer: POSIX scripts can have a shebang if you want them to. Since OP later asked for a ‘universal’ shebang,#!/bin/sh
would be the way to go in my opinion.
– Peschke
2 hours ago
add a comment |
You need to have a shebang in order to execute a script by referencing its path. Otherwise, the operating system will attempt to execute it, but will fail because it's not a binary executable file.
If you don't want to use a shebang you need to specify what should execute the script. In your case, it should be fish
.
fish myscript.sh
Ok, so I'm looking for a 'universal' shebang. What about#!/usr/bin/env bash
(see stackoverflow.com/questions/10376206/…) ? This line allows my script to be launched directly withfish
.
– suizokukan
5 hours ago
1
@suizokukan:#!/usr/bin/env bash
is only universal if every system you want to execute the script hasbash
installed. If you want portability, write your script to be compatible with POSIX standards. Then most shells will be able to execute it without issue (as most common shells are POSIX compliant).
– Peschke
4 hours ago
2
POSIX scripts don't have the shebang, and since fish isn't POSIX-compatible it can't call them anyway (the premise of this question), so I'm not sure that helps
– Michael Homer
4 hours ago
1
@MichaelHomer: POSIX scripts can have a shebang if you want them to. Since OP later asked for a ‘universal’ shebang,#!/bin/sh
would be the way to go in my opinion.
– Peschke
2 hours ago
add a comment |
You need to have a shebang in order to execute a script by referencing its path. Otherwise, the operating system will attempt to execute it, but will fail because it's not a binary executable file.
If you don't want to use a shebang you need to specify what should execute the script. In your case, it should be fish
.
fish myscript.sh
You need to have a shebang in order to execute a script by referencing its path. Otherwise, the operating system will attempt to execute it, but will fail because it's not a binary executable file.
If you don't want to use a shebang you need to specify what should execute the script. In your case, it should be fish
.
fish myscript.sh
answered 5 hours ago
Peschke
2,473924
2,473924
Ok, so I'm looking for a 'universal' shebang. What about#!/usr/bin/env bash
(see stackoverflow.com/questions/10376206/…) ? This line allows my script to be launched directly withfish
.
– suizokukan
5 hours ago
1
@suizokukan:#!/usr/bin/env bash
is only universal if every system you want to execute the script hasbash
installed. If you want portability, write your script to be compatible with POSIX standards. Then most shells will be able to execute it without issue (as most common shells are POSIX compliant).
– Peschke
4 hours ago
2
POSIX scripts don't have the shebang, and since fish isn't POSIX-compatible it can't call them anyway (the premise of this question), so I'm not sure that helps
– Michael Homer
4 hours ago
1
@MichaelHomer: POSIX scripts can have a shebang if you want them to. Since OP later asked for a ‘universal’ shebang,#!/bin/sh
would be the way to go in my opinion.
– Peschke
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Ok, so I'm looking for a 'universal' shebang. What about#!/usr/bin/env bash
(see stackoverflow.com/questions/10376206/…) ? This line allows my script to be launched directly withfish
.
– suizokukan
5 hours ago
1
@suizokukan:#!/usr/bin/env bash
is only universal if every system you want to execute the script hasbash
installed. If you want portability, write your script to be compatible with POSIX standards. Then most shells will be able to execute it without issue (as most common shells are POSIX compliant).
– Peschke
4 hours ago
2
POSIX scripts don't have the shebang, and since fish isn't POSIX-compatible it can't call them anyway (the premise of this question), so I'm not sure that helps
– Michael Homer
4 hours ago
1
@MichaelHomer: POSIX scripts can have a shebang if you want them to. Since OP later asked for a ‘universal’ shebang,#!/bin/sh
would be the way to go in my opinion.
– Peschke
2 hours ago
Ok, so I'm looking for a 'universal' shebang. What about
#!/usr/bin/env bash
(see stackoverflow.com/questions/10376206/…) ? This line allows my script to be launched directly with fish
.– suizokukan
5 hours ago
Ok, so I'm looking for a 'universal' shebang. What about
#!/usr/bin/env bash
(see stackoverflow.com/questions/10376206/…) ? This line allows my script to be launched directly with fish
.– suizokukan
5 hours ago
1
1
@suizokukan:
#!/usr/bin/env bash
is only universal if every system you want to execute the script has bash
installed. If you want portability, write your script to be compatible with POSIX standards. Then most shells will be able to execute it without issue (as most common shells are POSIX compliant).– Peschke
4 hours ago
@suizokukan:
#!/usr/bin/env bash
is only universal if every system you want to execute the script has bash
installed. If you want portability, write your script to be compatible with POSIX standards. Then most shells will be able to execute it without issue (as most common shells are POSIX compliant).– Peschke
4 hours ago
2
2
POSIX scripts don't have the shebang, and since fish isn't POSIX-compatible it can't call them anyway (the premise of this question), so I'm not sure that helps
– Michael Homer
4 hours ago
POSIX scripts don't have the shebang, and since fish isn't POSIX-compatible it can't call them anyway (the premise of this question), so I'm not sure that helps
– Michael Homer
4 hours ago
1
1
@MichaelHomer: POSIX scripts can have a shebang if you want them to. Since OP later asked for a ‘universal’ shebang,
#!/bin/sh
would be the way to go in my opinion.– Peschke
2 hours ago
@MichaelHomer: POSIX scripts can have a shebang if you want them to. Since OP later asked for a ‘universal’ shebang,
#!/bin/sh
would be the way to go in my opinion.– Peschke
2 hours ago
add a comment |
You need a shebang line if the executable file cannot be run natively by the kernel. The kernel can only run machine code in a specific format (ELF on most Unix variants), or sometimes other formats (e.g. on Linux you can register executable formats through binfmt_misc). If the executable file needs an interpreter then the kernel needs to know which interpreter to call. That's what the shebang line is for.
If your script is in fish syntax, its first line must be
#!/usr/bin/env fish
(You can use the absolute path instead, but then you'll have to modify the script if you want to run it on a machine where the fish
executable is in a different location, e.g. /usr/bin/fish
vs /usr/local/bin/fish
.)
If your script is in sh syntax, use
#!/bin/sh
(All modern Unix systems have a POSIX sh at /bin/sh
so you don't need env
.)
If your script is in bash syntax (which is sh plus some bash-specific extensions), use
#!/usr/bin/env bash
On Linux, in practice, #!/bin/bash
will also work.
All of this is independent of which shell you're calling the script from. All that matters is what language the script is written in.
add a comment |
You need a shebang line if the executable file cannot be run natively by the kernel. The kernel can only run machine code in a specific format (ELF on most Unix variants), or sometimes other formats (e.g. on Linux you can register executable formats through binfmt_misc). If the executable file needs an interpreter then the kernel needs to know which interpreter to call. That's what the shebang line is for.
If your script is in fish syntax, its first line must be
#!/usr/bin/env fish
(You can use the absolute path instead, but then you'll have to modify the script if you want to run it on a machine where the fish
executable is in a different location, e.g. /usr/bin/fish
vs /usr/local/bin/fish
.)
If your script is in sh syntax, use
#!/bin/sh
(All modern Unix systems have a POSIX sh at /bin/sh
so you don't need env
.)
If your script is in bash syntax (which is sh plus some bash-specific extensions), use
#!/usr/bin/env bash
On Linux, in practice, #!/bin/bash
will also work.
All of this is independent of which shell you're calling the script from. All that matters is what language the script is written in.
add a comment |
You need a shebang line if the executable file cannot be run natively by the kernel. The kernel can only run machine code in a specific format (ELF on most Unix variants), or sometimes other formats (e.g. on Linux you can register executable formats through binfmt_misc). If the executable file needs an interpreter then the kernel needs to know which interpreter to call. That's what the shebang line is for.
If your script is in fish syntax, its first line must be
#!/usr/bin/env fish
(You can use the absolute path instead, but then you'll have to modify the script if you want to run it on a machine where the fish
executable is in a different location, e.g. /usr/bin/fish
vs /usr/local/bin/fish
.)
If your script is in sh syntax, use
#!/bin/sh
(All modern Unix systems have a POSIX sh at /bin/sh
so you don't need env
.)
If your script is in bash syntax (which is sh plus some bash-specific extensions), use
#!/usr/bin/env bash
On Linux, in practice, #!/bin/bash
will also work.
All of this is independent of which shell you're calling the script from. All that matters is what language the script is written in.
You need a shebang line if the executable file cannot be run natively by the kernel. The kernel can only run machine code in a specific format (ELF on most Unix variants), or sometimes other formats (e.g. on Linux you can register executable formats through binfmt_misc). If the executable file needs an interpreter then the kernel needs to know which interpreter to call. That's what the shebang line is for.
If your script is in fish syntax, its first line must be
#!/usr/bin/env fish
(You can use the absolute path instead, but then you'll have to modify the script if you want to run it on a machine where the fish
executable is in a different location, e.g. /usr/bin/fish
vs /usr/local/bin/fish
.)
If your script is in sh syntax, use
#!/bin/sh
(All modern Unix systems have a POSIX sh at /bin/sh
so you don't need env
.)
If your script is in bash syntax (which is sh plus some bash-specific extensions), use
#!/usr/bin/env bash
On Linux, in practice, #!/bin/bash
will also work.
All of this is independent of which shell you're calling the script from. All that matters is what language the script is written in.
answered 1 hour ago
Gilles
528k12810571583
528k12810571583
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%2f491419%2ffish-shell-exec-format-error%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
1
Related: Which shell interpreter runs a script with no shebang?
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago
1
(the takeaway is that fish does not attempt POSIX compatibility there, so launching scripts from fish requires that execvp succeeds)
– Michael Homer
5 hours ago