Prev: how to compare the first field only
Next: Value of argument (just curious)
From: Kenny McCormack on 8 Aug 2010 20:12
In article <m3k4o1qg82.fsf(a)gmail.com>,
WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong(a)gmail.com> wrote:
....
>I think that is not safe, there are a considerable amount of
>Unix programs which don't work with Janis' solution, especially when
>dealing with passwords, for example, passwd, su, rlogin etc..
>expect(1) always work, and it is not hard to write a simple expect
>script to solve OP's problem.

ITA!

--
(This discussion group is about C, ...)

Wrong. It is only OCCASIONALLY a discussion group
about C; mostly, like most "discussion" groups, it is
off-topic Rorsharch [sic] revelations of the childhood
traumas of the participants...

From: Janis Papanagnou on 9 Aug 2010 02:46
WANG Cong schrieb:
> On 08/04/10 20:33, blmblm(a)myrealbox.com <blmblm(a)myrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <i3c3o1$hqp$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> askaholik schrieb:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I have a program that requires interactive inputs and I want to
>>>> somehow pass my inputs automatically to it.
>>>>
>>>> To be more clear, it looks like that
>>>> $./oldProgram
>>>> write a name: [the program is waiting for some input, I type "hello"
>>>> and press enter]
>>>> write the surname: [the program is waiting for some input, I type
>>>> "foo" and press enter]
>>>> etc...
>>> For example...
>>>
>>> ./oldProgram << EOT
>>> hello
>>> foo
>>> EOT
>>>
>>> or...
>>>
>>> echo $'hello\nfoo' | ./oldProgram
>>>
>>>
>>> Janis
>>>
>>>> I want to avoid passing the values from standard input (I have to call
>>>> that program hundreds times), I remember there was a trick to do it,
>>>> but I cannot figure it out. Any hint would be appreciated!!!
>> To the OP, and for future reference, maybe:
>>
>> Janis's solutions do *not* avoid the use of standard input, as
>> the term is used in context. What they do is "redirect" this
>> input stream, so it comes from something other than the keyboard.
>> Some programs actually do read directly from the keyboard [1],
>> and this kind of redirection won't work with them, but I think
>> I'm safe in saying [2] that most traditional-UNIX programs read
>> from standard input, and they do so in part because redirection
>> is so useful!
>>
>
> I think that is not safe, there are a considerable amount of
> Unix programs which don't work with Janis' solution, especially when
> dealing with passwords, for example, passwd, su, rlogin etc..

Consider; most of those programs are trying to read some user-ID and
password, and, the OP wrote: "I have a program" and "./oldProgram";
which is an indication that it's most likely just using the standard
channels and not /dev/tty (or a similar device); we don't know, but
certainly he replied: "it is exactly what I was looking for".

> expect(1) always work, and it is not hard to write a simple expect
> script to solve OP's problem.

Since it's so simple - it's just a few lines of code! - I suggest to
provide an expect based solution if you think it's necessary for the
OP's specific question.

Janis

>
>
From: blmblm on 9 Aug 2010 15:49
In article <m3k4o1qg82.fsf(a)gmail.com>,
WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/04/10 20:33, blmblm(a)myrealbox.com <blmblm(a)myrealbox.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <i3c3o1$hqp$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
> > Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> askaholik schrieb:

[ snip ]

> > To the OP, and for future reference, maybe:
> >
> > Janis's solutions do *not* avoid the use of standard input, as
> > the term is used in context. What they do is "redirect" this
> > input stream, so it comes from something other than the keyboard.
> > Some programs actually do read directly from the keyboard [1],
> > and this kind of redirection won't work with them, but I think
> > I'm safe in saying [2] that most traditional-UNIX programs read
> > from standard input, and they do so in part because redirection
> > is so useful!
> >
>
> I think that is not safe, there are a considerable amount of
> Unix programs which don't work with Janis' solution, especially when
> dealing with passwords, for example, passwd, su, rlogin etc..

Certainly there are exceptions, and thanks for reminding me/us of
what some of them are. Just as I said in that unquoted footnote,
repeated below .... Whether that really invalidates a claim
about what "most" programs are like -- yeah, whatever.

> expect(1) always work, and it is not hard to write a simple expect
> script to solve OP's problem.

For suitable values of "not hard", I suppose. I remember looking
at the documentation of "expect" once and thinking "maybe I'm not
*that* curious right now ...." :-)? Maybe it's an easy tool to
use once you learn it, though.

I'm mildly curious about why you didn't quote my footnotes

>>[1] "expect" supposedly provides a way to automate input to such
>>programs, but I haven't worked with it myself.

>>[2] And if I'm not, someone will be along soon to explain why not.
>>Sort of a :-).

when you quoted so much other text, but -- yeah, whatever.

--
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: how to compare the first field only
Next: Value of argument (just curious)