How to know which command is being executed without stopping it?
up vote
19
down vote
favorite
In my example, I am running a command that takes very long to be executed (several hours).
I don't really remember if I entered make or make -j4.
Of course I could stop it and press up key or check history to know it, but that would stop the process and I don't want that to happen (in case it is already doing make -j4).
Is there any way to know which command is being executed without stopping the process?
command-line make
edited Dec 5 at 16:40
muru
135k20289492
asked Dec 5 at 8:44
Daniel Viaño
10915
add a comment |
up vote
19
down vote
favorite
In my example, I am running a command that takes very long to be executed (several hours).
I don't really remember if I entered make or make -j4.
Of course I could stop it and press up key or check history to know it, but that would stop the process and I don't want that to happen (in case it is already doing make -j4).
Is there any way to know which command is being executed without stopping the process?
command-line make
edited Dec 5 at 16:40
muru
135k20289492
asked Dec 5 at 8:44
Daniel Viaño
10915
5
From another terminal, trypgrep -a make
– John1024
Dec 5 at 8:48
2
that was it, thanks @John1024
– Daniel Viaño
Dec 5 at 8:56
2
In the case ofmakeyou can stop and restart it and it should pick up where it left off.
– immibis
Dec 6 at 5:42
add a comment |
up vote
19
down vote
favorite
up vote
19
down vote
favorite
In my example, I am running a command that takes very long to be executed (several hours).
I don't really remember if I entered make or make -j4.
Of course I could stop it and press up key or check history to know it, but that would stop the process and I don't want that to happen (in case it is already doing make -j4).
Is there any way to know which command is being executed without stopping the process?
command-line make
edited Dec 5 at 16:40
muru
135k20289492
asked Dec 5 at 8:44
Daniel Viaño
10915
In my example, I am running a command that takes very long to be executed (several hours).
I don't really remember if I entered make or make -j4.
Of course I could stop it and press up key or check history to know it, but that would stop the process and I don't want that to happen (in case it is already doing make -j4).
Is there any way to know which command is being executed without stopping the process?
command-line make
command-line make
edited Dec 5 at 16:40
muru
135k20289492
asked Dec 5 at 8:44
Daniel Viaño
10915
edited Dec 5 at 16:40
muru
135k20289492
asked Dec 5 at 8:44
Daniel Viaño
10915
edited Dec 5 at 16:40
muru
135k20289492
edited Dec 5 at 16:40
muru
135k20289492
edited Dec 5 at 16:40
muru
135k20289492
135k20289492
asked Dec 5 at 8:44
Daniel Viaño
10915
asked Dec 5 at 8:44
Daniel Viaño
10915
asked Dec 5 at 8:44
Daniel Viaño
10915
10915
5
From another terminal, trypgrep -a make
– John1024
Dec 5 at 8:48
2
that was it, thanks @John1024
– Daniel Viaño
Dec 5 at 8:56
2
In the case ofmakeyou can stop and restart it and it should pick up where it left off.
– immibis
Dec 6 at 5:42
add a comment |
5
From another terminal, trypgrep -a make
– John1024
Dec 5 at 8:48
2
that was it, thanks @John1024
– Daniel Viaño
Dec 5 at 8:56
2
In the case ofmakeyou can stop and restart it and it should pick up where it left off.
– immibis
Dec 6 at 5:42
5
5
From another terminal, try
pgrep -a make– John1024
Dec 5 at 8:48
From another terminal, try
pgrep -a make– John1024
Dec 5 at 8:48
2
2
that was it, thanks @John1024
– Daniel Viaño
Dec 5 at 8:56
that was it, thanks @John1024
– Daniel Viaño
Dec 5 at 8:56
2
2
In the case of
make you can stop and restart it and it should pick up where it left off.– immibis
Dec 6 at 5:42
In the case of
make you can stop and restart it and it should pick up where it left off.– immibis
Dec 6 at 5:42
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
up vote
32
down vote
accepted
If you want to see the full command line for every instance of make that is running on your computer, open a new terminal and try:
pgrep -a make
pgrep is a program that searches through all processes on your computer. In this case, it is looking for programs named make. The option -a tells pgrep to list both the process ID and the full command line for each matching process. (Without -a, it would just return the process ID.) For more information on pgrep's many options, see man pgrep.
answered Dec 5 at 9:33
John1024
9,7592434
7
This is useful for simple cases like the one in the question. However if the command involved pipelines, loops, sequences of commands, internal commands, or variable expansion what you'd find withpgrepwould look different from the command which was typed on the command line.
– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:50
add a comment |
up vote
27
down vote
While the terminal window is active you can pause (suspend) the process by pressing Ctrl+Z. You can then push the job in the background by typing bg (your job will now continue in the background and you can at the same time work on the command line; this is equivalent to starting a job with & at the end of the command line). Then use cursor-arrows (up and down) to see which command you used. If you want (but this is not necessary) you can then get your job to the foreground by typing fg.
edited Dec 13 at 7:10
Kulfy
2,72331034
answered Dec 5 at 9:59
Stefan
28326
7
This works with some commands but not all. For example if you typed a loop likefor X in {1..1000} ; do sleep $X ; donethen the loop would be interrupted and remaining iterations would not happen.
– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:46
11
@kasperd Yes, quite annoying if you ask me, but I discovered a cool workaround for that issue. Surround a complicated command like that in parenthesis so it's a subshell. Then Ctrl-Z will suspend the whole subshell and resume correctly.
– penguin359
Dec 5 at 20:26
@kasperd Not in bash, but they do in zsh.
– JoL
Dec 5 at 22:08
4
No need to put the job into the background: it’s sufficient to suspend it, check the history (orjobs, as shown in @ichabod’s answer), and then resuming it viafg.
– Konrad Rudolph
Dec 6 at 14:22
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
I do something like Stefan: ^Z to pause the job, and then I run jobs. If you have multiple processes running, you may have to sort out which job was the one you paused, but this generally will give the command line. Then run fg to continue execution.
answered Dec 5 at 20:39
ichabod
1112
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
A good way to see this dynamically is to run top, and this tells you overall system state and the running processes on the system.
Doing a 'ps ux' shows your processes along with pid and other info, you can use skill to kill some of them off if you desire, man page for that is a good resource, and doing a skill or kill -9 gets sticky processes hung in device waits etc. You can also send other signals to processes such as -hup, gets daemons restarted etc.
Top is nice since it shows you process size, elapsed time, and current cpu states and that of memory and swap.
I often do a $make >& make.out& and then less or tail -f on the make.out log file. Since now make is detached as a process from my shell session.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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%2f1098580%2fhow-to-know-which-command-is-being-executed-without-stopping-it%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
32
down vote
accepted
If you want to see the full command line for every instance of make that is running on your computer, open a new terminal and try:
pgrep -a make
pgrep is a program that searches through all processes on your computer. In this case, it is looking for programs named make. The option -a tells pgrep to list both the process ID and the full command line for each matching process. (Without -a, it would just return the process ID.) For more information on pgrep's many options, see man pgrep.
answered Dec 5 at 9:33
John1024
9,7592434
7
This is useful for simple cases like the one in the question. However if the command involved pipelines, loops, sequences of commands, internal commands, or variable expansion what you'd find withpgrepwould look different from the command which was typed on the command line.
– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:50
add a comment |
up vote
32
down vote
accepted
If you want to see the full command line for every instance of make that is running on your computer, open a new terminal and try:
pgrep -a make
pgrep is a program that searches through all processes on your computer. In this case, it is looking for programs named make. The option -a tells pgrep to list both the process ID and the full command line for each matching process. (Without -a, it would just return the process ID.) For more information on pgrep's many options, see man pgrep.
answered Dec 5 at 9:33
John1024
9,7592434
7
This is useful for simple cases like the one in the question. However if the command involved pipelines, loops, sequences of commands, internal commands, or variable expansion what you'd find withpgrepwould look different from the command which was typed on the command line.
– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:50
add a comment |
up vote
32
down vote
accepted
up vote
32
down vote
accepted
If you want to see the full command line for every instance of make that is running on your computer, open a new terminal and try:
pgrep -a make
pgrep is a program that searches through all processes on your computer. In this case, it is looking for programs named make. The option -a tells pgrep to list both the process ID and the full command line for each matching process. (Without -a, it would just return the process ID.) For more information on pgrep's many options, see man pgrep.
answered Dec 5 at 9:33
John1024
9,7592434
If you want to see the full command line for every instance of make that is running on your computer, open a new terminal and try:
pgrep -a make
pgrep is a program that searches through all processes on your computer. In this case, it is looking for programs named make. The option -a tells pgrep to list both the process ID and the full command line for each matching process. (Without -a, it would just return the process ID.) For more information on pgrep's many options, see man pgrep.
answered Dec 5 at 9:33
John1024
9,7592434
answered Dec 5 at 9:33
John1024
9,7592434
answered Dec 5 at 9:33
John1024
9,7592434
answered Dec 5 at 9:33
John1024
9,7592434
9,7592434
7
This is useful for simple cases like the one in the question. However if the command involved pipelines, loops, sequences of commands, internal commands, or variable expansion what you'd find withpgrepwould look different from the command which was typed on the command line.
– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:50
add a comment |
7
This is useful for simple cases like the one in the question. However if the command involved pipelines, loops, sequences of commands, internal commands, or variable expansion what you'd find withpgrepwould look different from the command which was typed on the command line.
– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:50
7
7
This is useful for simple cases like the one in the question. However if the command involved pipelines, loops, sequences of commands, internal commands, or variable expansion what you'd find with
pgrep would look different from the command which was typed on the command line.– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:50
This is useful for simple cases like the one in the question. However if the command involved pipelines, loops, sequences of commands, internal commands, or variable expansion what you'd find with
pgrep would look different from the command which was typed on the command line.– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:50
add a comment |
up vote
27
down vote
While the terminal window is active you can pause (suspend) the process by pressing Ctrl+Z. You can then push the job in the background by typing bg (your job will now continue in the background and you can at the same time work on the command line; this is equivalent to starting a job with & at the end of the command line). Then use cursor-arrows (up and down) to see which command you used. If you want (but this is not necessary) you can then get your job to the foreground by typing fg.
edited Dec 13 at 7:10
Kulfy
2,72331034
answered Dec 5 at 9:59
Stefan
28326
7
This works with some commands but not all. For example if you typed a loop likefor X in {1..1000} ; do sleep $X ; donethen the loop would be interrupted and remaining iterations would not happen.
– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:46
11
@kasperd Yes, quite annoying if you ask me, but I discovered a cool workaround for that issue. Surround a complicated command like that in parenthesis so it's a subshell. Then Ctrl-Z will suspend the whole subshell and resume correctly.
– penguin359
Dec 5 at 20:26
@kasperd Not in bash, but they do in zsh.
– JoL
Dec 5 at 22:08
4
No need to put the job into the background: it’s sufficient to suspend it, check the history (orjobs, as shown in @ichabod’s answer), and then resuming it viafg.
– Konrad Rudolph
Dec 6 at 14:22
add a comment |
up vote
27
down vote
While the terminal window is active you can pause (suspend) the process by pressing Ctrl+Z. You can then push the job in the background by typing bg (your job will now continue in the background and you can at the same time work on the command line; this is equivalent to starting a job with & at the end of the command line). Then use cursor-arrows (up and down) to see which command you used. If you want (but this is not necessary) you can then get your job to the foreground by typing fg.
edited Dec 13 at 7:10
Kulfy
2,72331034
answered Dec 5 at 9:59
Stefan
28326
7
This works with some commands but not all. For example if you typed a loop likefor X in {1..1000} ; do sleep $X ; donethen the loop would be interrupted and remaining iterations would not happen.
– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:46
11
@kasperd Yes, quite annoying if you ask me, but I discovered a cool workaround for that issue. Surround a complicated command like that in parenthesis so it's a subshell. Then Ctrl-Z will suspend the whole subshell and resume correctly.
– penguin359
Dec 5 at 20:26
@kasperd Not in bash, but they do in zsh.
– JoL
Dec 5 at 22:08
4
No need to put the job into the background: it’s sufficient to suspend it, check the history (orjobs, as shown in @ichabod’s answer), and then resuming it viafg.
– Konrad Rudolph
Dec 6 at 14:22
add a comment |
up vote
27
down vote
up vote
27
down vote
While the terminal window is active you can pause (suspend) the process by pressing Ctrl+Z. You can then push the job in the background by typing bg (your job will now continue in the background and you can at the same time work on the command line; this is equivalent to starting a job with & at the end of the command line). Then use cursor-arrows (up and down) to see which command you used. If you want (but this is not necessary) you can then get your job to the foreground by typing fg.
edited Dec 13 at 7:10
Kulfy
2,72331034
answered Dec 5 at 9:59
Stefan
28326
While the terminal window is active you can pause (suspend) the process by pressing Ctrl+Z. You can then push the job in the background by typing bg (your job will now continue in the background and you can at the same time work on the command line; this is equivalent to starting a job with & at the end of the command line). Then use cursor-arrows (up and down) to see which command you used. If you want (but this is not necessary) you can then get your job to the foreground by typing fg.
edited Dec 13 at 7:10
Kulfy
2,72331034
answered Dec 5 at 9:59
Stefan
28326
edited Dec 13 at 7:10
Kulfy
2,72331034
edited Dec 13 at 7:10
Kulfy
2,72331034
edited Dec 13 at 7:10
Kulfy
2,72331034
2,72331034
answered Dec 5 at 9:59
Stefan
28326
answered Dec 5 at 9:59
Stefan
28326
answered Dec 5 at 9:59
Stefan
28326
28326
7
This works with some commands but not all. For example if you typed a loop likefor X in {1..1000} ; do sleep $X ; donethen the loop would be interrupted and remaining iterations would not happen.
– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:46
11
@kasperd Yes, quite annoying if you ask me, but I discovered a cool workaround for that issue. Surround a complicated command like that in parenthesis so it's a subshell. Then Ctrl-Z will suspend the whole subshell and resume correctly.
– penguin359
Dec 5 at 20:26
@kasperd Not in bash, but they do in zsh.
– JoL
Dec 5 at 22:08
4
No need to put the job into the background: it’s sufficient to suspend it, check the history (orjobs, as shown in @ichabod’s answer), and then resuming it viafg.
– Konrad Rudolph
Dec 6 at 14:22
add a comment |
7
This works with some commands but not all. For example if you typed a loop likefor X in {1..1000} ; do sleep $X ; donethen the loop would be interrupted and remaining iterations would not happen.
– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:46
11
@kasperd Yes, quite annoying if you ask me, but I discovered a cool workaround for that issue. Surround a complicated command like that in parenthesis so it's a subshell. Then Ctrl-Z will suspend the whole subshell and resume correctly.
– penguin359
Dec 5 at 20:26
@kasperd Not in bash, but they do in zsh.
– JoL
Dec 5 at 22:08
4
No need to put the job into the background: it’s sufficient to suspend it, check the history (orjobs, as shown in @ichabod’s answer), and then resuming it viafg.
– Konrad Rudolph
Dec 6 at 14:22
7
7
This works with some commands but not all. For example if you typed a loop like
for X in {1..1000} ; do sleep $X ; done then the loop would be interrupted and remaining iterations would not happen.– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:46
This works with some commands but not all. For example if you typed a loop like
for X in {1..1000} ; do sleep $X ; done then the loop would be interrupted and remaining iterations would not happen.– kasperd
Dec 5 at 12:46
11
11
@kasperd Yes, quite annoying if you ask me, but I discovered a cool workaround for that issue. Surround a complicated command like that in parenthesis so it's a subshell. Then Ctrl-Z will suspend the whole subshell and resume correctly.
– penguin359
Dec 5 at 20:26
@kasperd Yes, quite annoying if you ask me, but I discovered a cool workaround for that issue. Surround a complicated command like that in parenthesis so it's a subshell. Then Ctrl-Z will suspend the whole subshell and resume correctly.
– penguin359
Dec 5 at 20:26
@kasperd Not in bash, but they do in zsh.
– JoL
Dec 5 at 22:08
@kasperd Not in bash, but they do in zsh.
– JoL
Dec 5 at 22:08
4
4
No need to put the job into the background: it’s sufficient to suspend it, check the history (or
jobs, as shown in @ichabod’s answer), and then resuming it via fg.– Konrad Rudolph
Dec 6 at 14:22
No need to put the job into the background: it’s sufficient to suspend it, check the history (or
jobs, as shown in @ichabod’s answer), and then resuming it via fg.– Konrad Rudolph
Dec 6 at 14:22
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
I do something like Stefan: ^Z to pause the job, and then I run jobs. If you have multiple processes running, you may have to sort out which job was the one you paused, but this generally will give the command line. Then run fg to continue execution.
answered Dec 5 at 20:39
ichabod
1112
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
I do something like Stefan: ^Z to pause the job, and then I run jobs. If you have multiple processes running, you may have to sort out which job was the one you paused, but this generally will give the command line. Then run fg to continue execution.
answered Dec 5 at 20:39
ichabod
1112
add a comment |
up vote
10
down vote
up vote
10
down vote
I do something like Stefan: ^Z to pause the job, and then I run jobs. If you have multiple processes running, you may have to sort out which job was the one you paused, but this generally will give the command line. Then run fg to continue execution.
answered Dec 5 at 20:39
ichabod
1112
I do something like Stefan: ^Z to pause the job, and then I run jobs. If you have multiple processes running, you may have to sort out which job was the one you paused, but this generally will give the command line. Then run fg to continue execution.
answered Dec 5 at 20:39
ichabod
1112
answered Dec 5 at 20:39
ichabod
1112
answered Dec 5 at 20:39
ichabod
1112
answered Dec 5 at 20:39
ichabod
1112
1112
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
A good way to see this dynamically is to run top, and this tells you overall system state and the running processes on the system.
Doing a 'ps ux' shows your processes along with pid and other info, you can use skill to kill some of them off if you desire, man page for that is a good resource, and doing a skill or kill -9 gets sticky processes hung in device waits etc. You can also send other signals to processes such as -hup, gets daemons restarted etc.
Top is nice since it shows you process size, elapsed time, and current cpu states and that of memory and swap.
I often do a $make >& make.out& and then less or tail -f on the make.out log file. Since now make is detached as a process from my shell session.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
A good way to see this dynamically is to run top, and this tells you overall system state and the running processes on the system.
Doing a 'ps ux' shows your processes along with pid and other info, you can use skill to kill some of them off if you desire, man page for that is a good resource, and doing a skill or kill -9 gets sticky processes hung in device waits etc. You can also send other signals to processes such as -hup, gets daemons restarted etc.
Top is nice since it shows you process size, elapsed time, and current cpu states and that of memory and swap.
I often do a $make >& make.out& and then less or tail -f on the make.out log file. Since now make is detached as a process from my shell session.
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
A good way to see this dynamically is to run top, and this tells you overall system state and the running processes on the system.
Doing a 'ps ux' shows your processes along with pid and other info, you can use skill to kill some of them off if you desire, man page for that is a good resource, and doing a skill or kill -9 gets sticky processes hung in device waits etc. You can also send other signals to processes such as -hup, gets daemons restarted etc.
Top is nice since it shows you process size, elapsed time, and current cpu states and that of memory and swap.
I often do a $make >& make.out& and then less or tail -f on the make.out log file. Since now make is detached as a process from my shell session.
A good way to see this dynamically is to run top, and this tells you overall system state and the running processes on the system.
Doing a 'ps ux' shows your processes along with pid and other info, you can use skill to kill some of them off if you desire, man page for that is a good resource, and doing a skill or kill -9 gets sticky processes hung in device waits etc. You can also send other signals to processes such as -hup, gets daemons restarted etc.
Top is nice since it shows you process size, elapsed time, and current cpu states and that of memory and swap.
I often do a $make >& make.out& and then less or tail -f on the make.out log file. Since now make is detached as a process from my shell session.
answered Dec 6 at 17:02
user900446
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%2f1098580%2fhow-to-know-which-command-is-being-executed-without-stopping-it%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
5
From another terminal, try
pgrep -a make– John1024
Dec 5 at 8:48
2
that was it, thanks @John1024
– Daniel Viaño
Dec 5 at 8:56
2
In the case of
makeyou can stop and restart it and it should pick up where it left off.– immibis
Dec 6 at 5:42