7 
 [root@localhost tmppcm]# ls ; echo exit code was: $? & echo pid is: $! test.txt .. .... ..... ...... lastfile.txt [1] 1265 pid is: 1265 exit code was: 0

In above it is as it runs ls to begin with, and then ends by running the echo's in 'parallel'.

Not quite what I want. I'd like that the sequence ls and echo exit code was: $? to be performed in the background, and echo process id in 'parallel'.

A solution could be to use || instead of ; between ls and echo exit code was:

 [root@localhost tmppcm]# ls || echo exit code was: $? & echo pid is: $! [1] 1271 pid is: 1271 test.txt .. .... ..... ...... lastfile.txt exit code was: 0

Is there a more clever way to do this with the A ; B & C combination that I'm missing?

Improve this question
1
  • 1
    since you're using wait it might work for both jobspecs and pids, but there's a chance that command would only work from the prompt, and not within a script. See my question on SO about the difference between testing for a job to finish vs. a process to finsih--they are not identical Commented Nov 24, 2015 at 21:46

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
9

In this case you want to use command groups. Since you want some to run in the background we'll use the () variety so they get their own subshell. You can group the commands with the parens, and then put that group (and its subshell) in the background like:

( A; B ) & C

or in this specific example:

(ls ; echo exit code was: $?) & echo pid is: $!
Improve this answer
1
  • 1
    @hyprfrcb the & should be on the same line as the end of the group that is being put in the background. The contents of the subshell can be on separate lines, as can the commands to run after starting the group in the background. That is, A and B can be on separate lines above, and C can be on the line after the & Commented Nov 29, 2017 at 15:04

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.