how to split input to two pipes
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I would like to do something equivalent to this
some-expensive-command > /tmp/mytempfile
grep -v "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile >> output.txt
grep "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile | yet-another-command
preferably elegant and without the need for the tempfile
. I was thinking about piping through tee
, but the best I can think of might combine two of the three lines and still require the intermediate storage:
some-expensive-command | tee /tmp/mytempfile | grep -v "pattern" >> output.txt
grep "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile | yet-another-command
command-line pipe
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I would like to do something equivalent to this
some-expensive-command > /tmp/mytempfile
grep -v "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile >> output.txt
grep "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile | yet-another-command
preferably elegant and without the need for the tempfile
. I was thinking about piping through tee
, but the best I can think of might combine two of the three lines and still require the intermediate storage:
some-expensive-command | tee /tmp/mytempfile | grep -v "pattern" >> output.txt
grep "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile | yet-another-command
command-line pipe
So you want one command's output saved to fileoutput.txt
and that same output redirected to another command for further processing ? Is that what you're trying to do ?
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Nov 17 at 22:29
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I would like to do something equivalent to this
some-expensive-command > /tmp/mytempfile
grep -v "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile >> output.txt
grep "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile | yet-another-command
preferably elegant and without the need for the tempfile
. I was thinking about piping through tee
, but the best I can think of might combine two of the three lines and still require the intermediate storage:
some-expensive-command | tee /tmp/mytempfile | grep -v "pattern" >> output.txt
grep "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile | yet-another-command
command-line pipe
I would like to do something equivalent to this
some-expensive-command > /tmp/mytempfile
grep -v "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile >> output.txt
grep "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile | yet-another-command
preferably elegant and without the need for the tempfile
. I was thinking about piping through tee
, but the best I can think of might combine two of the three lines and still require the intermediate storage:
some-expensive-command | tee /tmp/mytempfile | grep -v "pattern" >> output.txt
grep "pattern" /tmp/mytempfile | yet-another-command
command-line pipe
command-line pipe
asked Nov 17 at 22:07
Hagen von Eitzen
5211
5211
So you want one command's output saved to fileoutput.txt
and that same output redirected to another command for further processing ? Is that what you're trying to do ?
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Nov 17 at 22:29
add a comment |
So you want one command's output saved to fileoutput.txt
and that same output redirected to another command for further processing ? Is that what you're trying to do ?
– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Nov 17 at 22:29
So you want one command's output saved to file
output.txt
and that same output redirected to another command for further processing ? Is that what you're trying to do ?– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Nov 17 at 22:29
So you want one command's output saved to file
output.txt
and that same output redirected to another command for further processing ? Is that what you're trying to do ?– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Nov 17 at 22:29
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
The way question reads it sounds like you want one stdin redirected to two different commands. If that's the case, take advantage of tee
plus process substitution:
some-expensive-command | tee >(grep 'pattern' > output.txt) >(grep -v 'pattern' | another-command)
Another way to look at this is by recognizing that grep
is line pattern matching tool, so by reading line at a time and using that same line in multiple commands we can achieve exactly the same effect:
rm output.txt # get rid of file so that we don't add old and new output
some-expensive-command | while IFS= read -r line || [ -n "$line" ]; do
printf "%sn" "$line" | grep 'pattern' >> output.txt
printf "%sn" "$line" | grep -v 'pattern' | another-command
done
# or if another-command needs all of the output,
# place `| another-comand` after `done` clause
Another way is to abandon grep
and use something more powerful, like awk
:
some-expensive-command | awk '/pattern/{print >> "output.txt"}; !/pattern/{print}' | another-command.
Practically speaking, don't worry about using temporary files, so long as you clean them up after using. If it works, it works.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Use bash
Process Substitution:
some-command | tee >(grep "pat" | another-command >>out1) | grep -v "pat" >>out2
The process substitution assigns some-command
’s output to grep "pat"
’s input, thus saving you the tempfile. Of course the data is still saved in a file (it’s always), just that you don’t have to take care of that. If you don’t want to save another-command
’s output in a file but rather print it I recommend to simply switch the two command lists.
Another nice source of information: man bash
/EXPANSION
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
The way question reads it sounds like you want one stdin redirected to two different commands. If that's the case, take advantage of tee
plus process substitution:
some-expensive-command | tee >(grep 'pattern' > output.txt) >(grep -v 'pattern' | another-command)
Another way to look at this is by recognizing that grep
is line pattern matching tool, so by reading line at a time and using that same line in multiple commands we can achieve exactly the same effect:
rm output.txt # get rid of file so that we don't add old and new output
some-expensive-command | while IFS= read -r line || [ -n "$line" ]; do
printf "%sn" "$line" | grep 'pattern' >> output.txt
printf "%sn" "$line" | grep -v 'pattern' | another-command
done
# or if another-command needs all of the output,
# place `| another-comand` after `done` clause
Another way is to abandon grep
and use something more powerful, like awk
:
some-expensive-command | awk '/pattern/{print >> "output.txt"}; !/pattern/{print}' | another-command.
Practically speaking, don't worry about using temporary files, so long as you clean them up after using. If it works, it works.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
The way question reads it sounds like you want one stdin redirected to two different commands. If that's the case, take advantage of tee
plus process substitution:
some-expensive-command | tee >(grep 'pattern' > output.txt) >(grep -v 'pattern' | another-command)
Another way to look at this is by recognizing that grep
is line pattern matching tool, so by reading line at a time and using that same line in multiple commands we can achieve exactly the same effect:
rm output.txt # get rid of file so that we don't add old and new output
some-expensive-command | while IFS= read -r line || [ -n "$line" ]; do
printf "%sn" "$line" | grep 'pattern' >> output.txt
printf "%sn" "$line" | grep -v 'pattern' | another-command
done
# or if another-command needs all of the output,
# place `| another-comand` after `done` clause
Another way is to abandon grep
and use something more powerful, like awk
:
some-expensive-command | awk '/pattern/{print >> "output.txt"}; !/pattern/{print}' | another-command.
Practically speaking, don't worry about using temporary files, so long as you clean them up after using. If it works, it works.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
The way question reads it sounds like you want one stdin redirected to two different commands. If that's the case, take advantage of tee
plus process substitution:
some-expensive-command | tee >(grep 'pattern' > output.txt) >(grep -v 'pattern' | another-command)
Another way to look at this is by recognizing that grep
is line pattern matching tool, so by reading line at a time and using that same line in multiple commands we can achieve exactly the same effect:
rm output.txt # get rid of file so that we don't add old and new output
some-expensive-command | while IFS= read -r line || [ -n "$line" ]; do
printf "%sn" "$line" | grep 'pattern' >> output.txt
printf "%sn" "$line" | grep -v 'pattern' | another-command
done
# or if another-command needs all of the output,
# place `| another-comand` after `done` clause
Another way is to abandon grep
and use something more powerful, like awk
:
some-expensive-command | awk '/pattern/{print >> "output.txt"}; !/pattern/{print}' | another-command.
Practically speaking, don't worry about using temporary files, so long as you clean them up after using. If it works, it works.
The way question reads it sounds like you want one stdin redirected to two different commands. If that's the case, take advantage of tee
plus process substitution:
some-expensive-command | tee >(grep 'pattern' > output.txt) >(grep -v 'pattern' | another-command)
Another way to look at this is by recognizing that grep
is line pattern matching tool, so by reading line at a time and using that same line in multiple commands we can achieve exactly the same effect:
rm output.txt # get rid of file so that we don't add old and new output
some-expensive-command | while IFS= read -r line || [ -n "$line" ]; do
printf "%sn" "$line" | grep 'pattern' >> output.txt
printf "%sn" "$line" | grep -v 'pattern' | another-command
done
# or if another-command needs all of the output,
# place `| another-comand` after `done` clause
Another way is to abandon grep
and use something more powerful, like awk
:
some-expensive-command | awk '/pattern/{print >> "output.txt"}; !/pattern/{print}' | another-command.
Practically speaking, don't worry about using temporary files, so long as you clean them up after using. If it works, it works.
edited Nov 18 at 1:33
answered Nov 17 at 22:58
Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
68k9142301
68k9142301
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Use bash
Process Substitution:
some-command | tee >(grep "pat" | another-command >>out1) | grep -v "pat" >>out2
The process substitution assigns some-command
’s output to grep "pat"
’s input, thus saving you the tempfile. Of course the data is still saved in a file (it’s always), just that you don’t have to take care of that. If you don’t want to save another-command
’s output in a file but rather print it I recommend to simply switch the two command lists.
Another nice source of information: man bash
/EXPANSION
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
Use bash
Process Substitution:
some-command | tee >(grep "pat" | another-command >>out1) | grep -v "pat" >>out2
The process substitution assigns some-command
’s output to grep "pat"
’s input, thus saving you the tempfile. Of course the data is still saved in a file (it’s always), just that you don’t have to take care of that. If you don’t want to save another-command
’s output in a file but rather print it I recommend to simply switch the two command lists.
Another nice source of information: man bash
/EXPANSION
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Use bash
Process Substitution:
some-command | tee >(grep "pat" | another-command >>out1) | grep -v "pat" >>out2
The process substitution assigns some-command
’s output to grep "pat"
’s input, thus saving you the tempfile. Of course the data is still saved in a file (it’s always), just that you don’t have to take care of that. If you don’t want to save another-command
’s output in a file but rather print it I recommend to simply switch the two command lists.
Another nice source of information: man bash
/EXPANSION
Use bash
Process Substitution:
some-command | tee >(grep "pat" | another-command >>out1) | grep -v "pat" >>out2
The process substitution assigns some-command
’s output to grep "pat"
’s input, thus saving you the tempfile. Of course the data is still saved in a file (it’s always), just that you don’t have to take care of that. If you don’t want to save another-command
’s output in a file but rather print it I recommend to simply switch the two command lists.
Another nice source of information: man bash
/EXPANSION
edited Nov 17 at 22:32
answered Nov 17 at 22:15
dessert
21.4k55896
21.4k55896
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- 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%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1093843%2fhow-to-split-input-to-two-pipes%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
So you want one command's output saved to file
output.txt
and that same output redirected to another command for further processing ? Is that what you're trying to do ?– Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
Nov 17 at 22:29