Usually I capture the output via a subshell:
result="$(command 2>&1)"
If the command is source, the subshell swallows some (all?) changes to the scripts shell's environment.
How can I capture the output of source into a variable?
Asked
Active
Viewed 633 times
4
pico_prob
- 835
- 8
- 13
-
What is the point of capturing the output of `source`? – oguz ismail Mar 27 '21 at 14:12
-
Yes, all changes are lost when the subshell exits (unless there are files written). A subshell is not allowed to alter the parent's environment. – glenn jackman Mar 27 '21 at 15:03
-
@oguz ismail: error-handling – pico_prob Mar 27 '21 at 15:26
-
That is usually done using exit statuses of commands. – oguz ismail Mar 27 '21 at 15:28
-
@oguz ismail: That is what I do. I also like to log :) – pico_prob Mar 27 '21 at 15:29
-
@Philippe: If I get this right, you'll run into the subshell isolation problem (env vars are lost) – pico_prob Mar 27 '21 at 15:34
-
If you own the script you're sourcing, you could (instead of sourcing it) make it produce a set of assignments like `VAR=value` on standard output (keep standard error for errors and logging only). Then invoke it with `eval "$(bash myscript.sh)"`. This is what pyenv does. – Thomas Mar 27 '21 at 19:12
1 Answers
9
Surprisingly tricky question!
My first thought was to use a named pipe (mkfifo(1)), but those have a finite buffer size, so if the sourced script fills up the buffer the script would hang. And you can't use a background process to drain the buffer because you want the output in a variable in the original process eventually.
I'm sure there's a way to make it work entirely in memory, but in the end I think a simple and stupid redirect to a temporary file is the most straightforward and robust solution:
OUTPUT_FILE=$(mktemp)
source other_script.sh >$OUTPUT_FILE 2>&1
OUTPUT="$(< "$OUTPUT_FILE")"
rm -f "$OUTPUT_FILE"
(See this question and in particular BashFAQ 062 for security implications of mktemp though.)
Thomas
- 162,537
- 44
- 333
- 446
-
1I think this is an nifty, clean solution. I don't mind leaving the RAM for a moment :) I liked it from the beginning, only marked now as 'accepted' to wait for other answers. – pico_prob Apr 22 '21 at 09:14