Scripting GNU in the 21st Century
Most people tend to encounter shell scripts as attempts to write portable
utilities that run properly on most, if not all, UNIX workalikes. Instead of
making the best use of the shell and related programs, these scripts restrict
themselves to the absolute most portable baseline of features. The extreme
example of this sort of programming can be seen when one looks at the
configure scripts generated by the autoconf program.
But this is 2004, and the full GNU environment is now commonplace. The
advanced shells and utilities now are the default user environment for
GNU/Linux systems, and they are available as install options on BSD-based systems.
Even proprietary UNIXes often have complete sets of GNU software laid atop them
to bring them up to date with the modern world. Because GNU software can be
obtained at little or no cost, there is no excuse to continue scripting in a
retrograde proprietary environment.
The BART Script
I live in the San Francisco Bay Area, mere walking distance from one of the Bay
Area Rapid Transit (BART) stations. I do not drive, so I rely on the system
for my trips downtown. The
BART Web site offers an on-line trip
planner, but I perform the same sort of query often and find the interface less
convenient than a command-line script.
In order to save time, I decided to write a shell script that would fetch the
train arrival information for my station and display it in a colored ASCII
table on stdout. It should accept station codes for any arbitrary trip but
use defaults specified in a per-user configuration file. I did not want
to write the schedule analysis code, so I decided to perform
a screen scrape of the BART trip planner. wget would submit the trip planner
form, and the resulting Web page would be formatted with various tools.
Getting Started
The first line of most shell scripts begins with
#!/bin/sh, which causes the
script to be interpreted by the venerable old Bourne shell. This is
used largely because classic Bourne is the only shell guaranteed to be on
all UNIX and UNIX-like systems. Because this script is designed to work in a modern GNU system, it
begins with #!/bin/bash. Users of BSD systems may wish to change it to
#!/usr/local/bin/bash or perhaps
#!/usr/bin/env bash.
Using bash instead of the classic Bourne shell provides us with some useful features we
can put to good use in a moment. For one thing, bash allows us to break
down our script using functions. The bash string manipulation routines
also can save us some time by performing operations in-line that
otherwise would have to be fed into an external sed or awk process.
Any good program has configuration files, so we can set up a traditional
rc filesystem. The rc at the end of many configuration files stands for
run commands, and it typically refers to the fact that the configuration file
is loaded in like a script.
test -r /etc/bartrc && source /etc/bartrc test -r ~/.bartrc && source ~/.bartrc
We also should set the default departure and arrival station codes to Rockridge
and Embarcadero, respectively. We use the compact bash syntax for an
alternate value if a variable is undefined, so users can set the BARTSTART
and BARTDEST variables in their own environments if they like.
BARTSTART=${BARTSTART:-ROCKR}
BARTDEST=${BARTDEST:-EMBAR}
Functions
The first function we write is the basic usage guideline message, which
helps guide development of the rest of the program.
function usage {
echo "Usage:"
echo " $(basename $0) [-hl] [ [<source>] <destination> ]"
echo " To change defaults, set the BARTSTART and BARTDEST"
echo " variables in your ~/.bartrc"
echo
echo "Flags:"
echo " -l, --list List station codes with names"
echo " -h, --help This message"
}
We now have a simple usage command available that prints out the
argument format for the script. Notice that we used $(basename
$0) to determine automatically the filename of the script.
We also allow an optional destination station code as an argument, which may be preceded by an optional
departure station code.
Grabbing the Form Output
HTTP has two methods for submitting selections to a form, GET and POST. The
POST method is the most powerful, but the GET method allows us to specify
values in the URL itself. This makes the GET method most convenient for
scripting, because we can specify all relevant form fields as an argument to a
simple tool, such as wget.
First, we set up the base URL to the form, specifying options to minimize
the amount of formatting around the data.
baseurl="http://bart.gov/textonly/stations/schedule.asp?ct=1&format=quick&print=yes"
Looking at the form's HTML source code, we determine which fields have which
names and begin to construct additions to the above URL. The date we're
interested in is the current moment, and we use the date command's own
formatting options to construct the date and time portion of the form.
date_now=$(date +"&time_mode=departs&depart_month=%m&depart_date=%d&depart_time=%I:%M+%p")
The $( ... ) syntax is simply a more explicit version of the backticks,
allowing us to use the output of a command as part of a line of shell code.
Next, we use the BARTSTART and BARTDEST variables to enter the stations
in which we are interested.
stations="&origin=${BARTSTART}&destination=${BARTDEST}"
Then, we use the wget utility to submit the form, redirecting all warning
messages to /dev/null so as not to confuse our script. The full function looks
like this:
function submitform {
baseurl="http://bart.gov/textonly/stations/schedule.asp?ct=1&format=quick&print=yes"
date_now=$(date +"&time_mode=departs&depart_month=%m&depart_date=%d&depart_time=%I:%M+%p")
stations="&origin=${BARTSTART}&destination=${BARTDEST}"
wget -O - -o /dev/null ${baseurl}${date_now}${stations}
}
Parsing HTML
HTML is a nested data format and often doesn't lend itself to the sort of
tabular data processing at which shell tools excel. Each tag or chunk of data
comes wrapped in a surrounding context, requiring more programming work to
analyze the structure.
Fortunately, a tool already exists that represents nested structures in a
format that's easy for shell scripts to manage: the find utility. Given a tree
of directories and files, it prints output like the following:
work/ work/tmp work/NOTES work/outgoing work/outgoing/e-mail work/outgoing/done.txt work/incoming work/incoming/TODO
Dan Egnor has written a similar tool for HTML and XML called
xml2. Given a stream of HTML tags such as
<html><body><a
href="http://linuxjournal.com">Linux
Journal</a></body></html>, it prints the following output:
/html/body/a/@href=http://linuxjournal.com /html/body/a=Linux Journal
Being Selective
I temporarily put submitform | html2 at the bottom of the script to take a
look at the resulting data. I looked for the names of stations, times and
other bits of information I wished to display. As luck would have it, the
HTML was nicely uniform, so it was easy to separate out the important data.
The interesting data is all in table data cells within table rows within a
table within a div tag within the body of the document. This means that
running
submitform | html2 | grep /html/body/div/table/tr/td=
prints something like the following for each train:
/html/body/div/table/tr/td=Rockridge /html/body/div/table/tr/td=at 4:34 pm /html/body/div/table/tr/td=San Francisco Int'l Airport train /html/body/div/table/tr/td=Embarcadero Station /html/body/div/table/tr/td=at 4:54 pm /html/body/div/table/tr/td=Bikes Allowed
Separating the HTML context from the actual data was as simple as piping the
result through cut -d = -f 2 to split off everything before the first =.
The final data extraction function is as follows:
function extractdata {
submitform | html2 2> /dev/null | \
grep /html/body/div/table/tr/td= | cut -d = -f 2
}
Formatting Output
In an earlier version of this script, I relied on an external awk program
to format the data. The awk language is nice for these kinds of situations,
because it has a structure in which you specify a regular expression, or
other pattern, and the code to execute when a line of input matches that
pattern. Thus, I could write a routine that runs whenever a certain time was
encountered or when a note about bicycle rules appeared.
The Bourne shell--yes, even the old classic one--provides us with an awk-like
construct that is useful in this situation: the case statement. Combining a
while loop and a case test can provide somewhat awk-like scripting features,
especially when combined with bash's more advanced string manipulation.
The basic format is that of a series of shell glob patterns separated by pipes
(|) and ending with a right-parenthesis. Then comes a set of shell commands,
terminated with a double-semicolon (;;) before the next pattern can be
specified.
Let's look at the formatting function:
function formatdata {
echo -n "Current time: $(date +'%l:%M%p')"
echo " (note that first train listed may be in the past)"
board="Board:"
while read i
do
case $i in
*train)
train=$i
departure=$arrival
beginning=$destination;;
at\ *)
arrival=${i#at };;
Timed|Transfer)
read junk
board="Xfer:";;
*\ Allowed)
echo -n "${board} "
echo -n "(${departure}) ${beginning} to ${destination} (${arrival}) "
echo "[${train}] (${i% Allowed})";;
*)
destination=$i;;
esac
done
}
In addition to the while loop and the case statement, this portion of the
script uses an advanced feature of bash that I learned from Jim Dennis during
an SVLUG meeting. ${VARIABLE#PATTERN} cuts off the left side of VARIABLE if it
matches PATTERN, and ${VARIABLE%PATTERN} cuts off the right side. The trick to
remembering which is which, as Jim Dennis told me, is that the # symbol
(Shift+3) is to the left of the % symbol (Shift+5) on a US keyboard. This
allows us to strip out unneeded text from our printout without shelling out to
sed or awk.
Putting extractdata | formatdata at the bottom of the script verifies that
our base functionality is working as it should.
Command-Line Options
In our usage function, we mentioned a number of command-line options. For one
thing, we promised that we would allow the user to list station codes. Alas,
the function to do this is nowhere near as elegant as the rest of the script:
function liststations {
wget -O - -o /dev/null 'http://bart.gov/index.asp?ct=1' | \
html2 2> /dev/null | \
sed '/\/html\/body\/table\/tbody\/tr\/td\/table\/tr\/td\/form\/select\/@name=origin/,/\/html\/body\/table\/tbody\/tr\/td\/table\/tr\/td\/form\/br/p;d;' | \
cut -d = -f 2 | grep -v ^/ | tail +6 | \
while read i; do read j; echo -e "$i\t$j"; read blank; done
}
The command-line arguments to a bash script are stored in numbered variables.
Recall that we used $0 to get the name of the script in the usage function.
The rest of the arguments are likewise stored in $1, $2 and so on. The number of
arguments is stored in the $# variable.
The end of our script now reads:
case $1 in -h|--help) usage exit 0;; -l|--list) liststations exit 0;; -*|--*) usage exit 1;; esac if [ $# = 1 ] then BARTDEST=$1 elif [ $# = 2 ] then BARTDEST=$2 BARTSTART=$1 fi extractdata | formatdata
Other Features
The full version I use contains all sorts of extra features, including color
escape sequences, return trips with a specified delay and the ability to
simply spit out the URL to be pasted into a Web browser. That version
will be available
here
for the foreseeable future.
Nick Moffitt is a free software enthusiast living in Oakland,
California, where he maintains a multiuser community shell server. He is a member
of the LNX-BBC Project and maintains GAR, nwall and the popular game
robotfindskitten.










This week 5 lucky Members will receive a copy of The Official Ubuntu Server Book by Benjamin Mako Hill and Linux Journal's very own Kyle Rankin. No entry necessary. Check back here early next week to find out who the lucky Online Members are.




Comments
Re: Scripting GNU in the 21st Century
It should be noted that the LSB is POSIX-based.
Re: Scripting GNU in the 21st Century
Overall, for someone learning bash, this is probably a reasonable example. I have many similar ones myself (grabbing satellite wildfeed data, for example).
However, as a means of introducing a newcomer to bash, or as a convincing description of why the newcomer should be using bash, I feel it falls short.
For example, some simple timing shows that his "$(basename $0)" construct is almost 100x slower than using "${0##*/}", although he does use another version of the same construct later, meaing that he is aware of it!
His repeated use of the backslash character as a line continuation does not improve the readability of the script; in fact, it makes it worse. Leave it out! Yes, it still works -- if the line ends with a character which indicates there's more needed, the line continuation character is redundant. The pipe symbol (vertical bar) is such a character.
In general, all variable usage should be enclosed in double quotes (ie, "Dollar signs in Double quotes"). This technique is only wrong 1 time out of 100, so the programmer will be correct 99% of the time. :) Yes, it may mean the double quotes are redundant in some cases, but there's a lot to be said for consistency, and hence, readability. Only when dealing with word splitting (where you want the word split), will the double quotes be incorrect.
He appears to use brackets in "if" statements when the POSIX (?) technique would be double parentheses (brackets are for string comparisons, parens are for numeric comparisons, and the doubled form of each is recommended since they turn off I/O redirection, wildcarding, and word splitting). Maybe he doesn't know?
Lastly, the "liststations" function seems overly complex to me. First, is it really necessary to specify the entire XPath all the way from the "html" element down to the "select" element and its attribute?? I haven't seen the data, but I'd be willing to bet that just the "select" element and attribute would be enough (since select is non-functional outside of forms anyway, and the attribute specifies the name of the select element!). Regardless of whether simplification is possible, change the delimiter of the regexpr! Use something other than a slash and avoid LTS ("leaning toothpick syndrome", per Larry Wall). With the text thus cleaned up visually, maybe let sed also do the elimination of text up to and including the equals sign? That eliminates the need for cut, although it may hurt readability. Additionally, sed can also replace the while loop; tell sed to match on the "select" element and attribute, then read three more lines into the holding space, appending them to whats already there. Now run a substitution on the hold space and print the result. (Or if you're not comfortable with sed, use awk, and you still eliminate the cut and while loop.) YMMV.
Overall, I agree with the other comment posted here that the standard for scripts should be POSIX, not a particular tool. Of course, POSIX has its own problems (quite a few, actually!), but that's a decision that individual organizations need to make: portability vs. speed/usability.
The sh POSIX standard
The sha-bang ( #!) at the head of a script tells your system that this file is a set of commands to be fed to the command interpreter indicated. The #! is actually a two-byte [1] "magic number", a special marker that designates a file type, or in this case an executable shell script (see man magic for more details on this fascinating topic). Immediately following the sha-bang is a path name. This is the path to the program that interprets the commands in the script, whether it be a shell, a programming language, or a utility. This command interpreter then executes the commands in the script, starting at the top (line 1 of the script), ignoring comments. [2]
#!/bin/sh
#!/bin/bash
#!/usr/bin/perl
#!/usr/bin/tcl
#!/bin/sed -f
#!/usr/awk -f
Each of the above script header lines calls a different command interpreter, be it /bin/sh, the default shell (bash in a Linux system) or otherwise. [3] Using #!/bin/sh, the default Bourne Shell in most commercial variants of Unix, makes the script portable to non-Linux machines, though you may have to sacrifice a few Bash-specific features. The script will, however, conform to the POSIX [4] sh standard.
REF:
1) Advanced Bash-Scripting Guide
2) The Single UNIX Specification, Version 3
The Horror
While it's a neat hack to parse HTML using bash, and I respect the authors significant contributions to Free Software (LNX-BBC, GAR - "We're not worthy!"), isn't this really a sign that scripting activities on GNU/Linux (and UNIX systems, if you must) should really be employing proper languages like Python and [insert favourite "agile" language here]?
Re: The Horror
No. These days anything goes and Bash is appropriately qualified. Respect is due to people who enjoy time-tested languages.
Re: Scripting GNU in the 21st Century
Somebody go tell those who are making the 'GNU' autoconf and automake??
Re: Scripting GNU in the 21st Century
.. of course, the enitre point of GNU autotools is to enable you to code programs wuch that they compile regardless of what is and isn't avaliable on the build, host and target platforms, and if we start assuming they're fully GNU compatible it sort of defeats the point a bit, no?
Caution: Theater-Wide Monitor Required (NT)
.
Post new comment