Does cd . have use?












2















One of the tutorials I've been following briefly stated that cd . has no use. When trying to replicate issue shown by OP in Symbolic link recursion - what makes it “reset”?, I also tried cd ., which showed the same effect OP described (growing $PWD variable), which can be countered with cd -P.



This makes me wonder, is there any case where one does in fact would want to use cd . ?






cd-command







share|improve this question



























    2















    One of the tutorials I've been following briefly stated that cd . has no use. When trying to replicate issue shown by OP in Symbolic link recursion - what makes it “reset”?, I also tried cd ., which showed the same effect OP described (growing $PWD variable), which can be countered with cd -P.



    This makes me wonder, is there any case where one does in fact would want to use cd . ?






    cd-command







    share|improve this question

























      2












      2








      2








      One of the tutorials I've been following briefly stated that cd . has no use. When trying to replicate issue shown by OP in Symbolic link recursion - what makes it “reset”?, I also tried cd ., which showed the same effect OP described (growing $PWD variable), which can be countered with cd -P.



      This makes me wonder, is there any case where one does in fact would want to use cd . ?






      cd-command







      share|improve this question














      One of the tutorials I've been following briefly stated that cd . has no use. When trying to replicate issue shown by OP in Symbolic link recursion - what makes it “reset”?, I also tried cd ., which showed the same effect OP described (growing $PWD variable), which can be countered with cd -P.



      This makes me wonder, is there any case where one does in fact would want to use cd . ?






      cd-command




      cd-command






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 1 hour ago









      Sergiy KolodyazhnyySergiy Kolodyazhnyy

      8,70912355




      8,70912355






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2














          The path of directory could have changed since the last executed command and without cd . bash and ksh93 shells will rely on logical working directory described in the linked post in the question; so calling cd . which makes the shell issue getcwd() syscall, will ensure your current path is still valid.



          Steps to reproduce in bash:




          1. in terminal tab issue mkdir ./dir_no_1; cd ./dir_no_1

          2. in different terminal tab issue mv dir_no_1 dir_no_2

          3. issue in first terminal tab echo $PWD and pwd. Notice that the directory has been externally renamed, shell's environment has not been updated.

          4. issue cd .; pwd; echo $PWD. Notice the value will be updated.


          ksh93, however, does not update the environment information, so cd . in ksh93 may in fact be useless. In /bin/dash on Ubuntu and other Debian based systems, cd . returns dash: 3: cd: can't cd to . error, however cd -P . works ( unlike in ksh93 ).






          share|improve this answer































            1














            I think this is overthinking the problem. cd . may not be something that one would manually run in the usual course of things, but it definitely is something that can come up in programmatic execution (think of any situation where you might cd to the directory containing a file, whose path is supplied by the user). Therefore, it doesn't have to have some specific use: as long as it fulfills the usual semantics of cd <some-path>, it is useful.






            share|improve this answer
























            • Agreed, . should be treated as a valid path specified by cd syntax just fine.

              – Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
              1 hour ago











            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "106"
            };
            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',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            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
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f495899%2fdoes-cd-have-use%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            2














            The path of directory could have changed since the last executed command and without cd . bash and ksh93 shells will rely on logical working directory described in the linked post in the question; so calling cd . which makes the shell issue getcwd() syscall, will ensure your current path is still valid.



            Steps to reproduce in bash:




            1. in terminal tab issue mkdir ./dir_no_1; cd ./dir_no_1

            2. in different terminal tab issue mv dir_no_1 dir_no_2

            3. issue in first terminal tab echo $PWD and pwd. Notice that the directory has been externally renamed, shell's environment has not been updated.

            4. issue cd .; pwd; echo $PWD. Notice the value will be updated.


            ksh93, however, does not update the environment information, so cd . in ksh93 may in fact be useless. In /bin/dash on Ubuntu and other Debian based systems, cd . returns dash: 3: cd: can't cd to . error, however cd -P . works ( unlike in ksh93 ).






            share|improve this answer




























              2














              The path of directory could have changed since the last executed command and without cd . bash and ksh93 shells will rely on logical working directory described in the linked post in the question; so calling cd . which makes the shell issue getcwd() syscall, will ensure your current path is still valid.



              Steps to reproduce in bash:




              1. in terminal tab issue mkdir ./dir_no_1; cd ./dir_no_1

              2. in different terminal tab issue mv dir_no_1 dir_no_2

              3. issue in first terminal tab echo $PWD and pwd. Notice that the directory has been externally renamed, shell's environment has not been updated.

              4. issue cd .; pwd; echo $PWD. Notice the value will be updated.


              ksh93, however, does not update the environment information, so cd . in ksh93 may in fact be useless. In /bin/dash on Ubuntu and other Debian based systems, cd . returns dash: 3: cd: can't cd to . error, however cd -P . works ( unlike in ksh93 ).






              share|improve this answer


























                2












                2








                2







                The path of directory could have changed since the last executed command and without cd . bash and ksh93 shells will rely on logical working directory described in the linked post in the question; so calling cd . which makes the shell issue getcwd() syscall, will ensure your current path is still valid.



                Steps to reproduce in bash:




                1. in terminal tab issue mkdir ./dir_no_1; cd ./dir_no_1

                2. in different terminal tab issue mv dir_no_1 dir_no_2

                3. issue in first terminal tab echo $PWD and pwd. Notice that the directory has been externally renamed, shell's environment has not been updated.

                4. issue cd .; pwd; echo $PWD. Notice the value will be updated.


                ksh93, however, does not update the environment information, so cd . in ksh93 may in fact be useless. In /bin/dash on Ubuntu and other Debian based systems, cd . returns dash: 3: cd: can't cd to . error, however cd -P . works ( unlike in ksh93 ).






                share|improve this answer













                The path of directory could have changed since the last executed command and without cd . bash and ksh93 shells will rely on logical working directory described in the linked post in the question; so calling cd . which makes the shell issue getcwd() syscall, will ensure your current path is still valid.



                Steps to reproduce in bash:




                1. in terminal tab issue mkdir ./dir_no_1; cd ./dir_no_1

                2. in different terminal tab issue mv dir_no_1 dir_no_2

                3. issue in first terminal tab echo $PWD and pwd. Notice that the directory has been externally renamed, shell's environment has not been updated.

                4. issue cd .; pwd; echo $PWD. Notice the value will be updated.


                ksh93, however, does not update the environment information, so cd . in ksh93 may in fact be useless. In /bin/dash on Ubuntu and other Debian based systems, cd . returns dash: 3: cd: can't cd to . error, however cd -P . works ( unlike in ksh93 ).







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 1 hour ago









                Sergiy KolodyazhnyySergiy Kolodyazhnyy

                8,70912355




                8,70912355

























                    1














                    I think this is overthinking the problem. cd . may not be something that one would manually run in the usual course of things, but it definitely is something that can come up in programmatic execution (think of any situation where you might cd to the directory containing a file, whose path is supplied by the user). Therefore, it doesn't have to have some specific use: as long as it fulfills the usual semantics of cd <some-path>, it is useful.






                    share|improve this answer
























                    • Agreed, . should be treated as a valid path specified by cd syntax just fine.

                      – Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
                      1 hour ago
















                    1














                    I think this is overthinking the problem. cd . may not be something that one would manually run in the usual course of things, but it definitely is something that can come up in programmatic execution (think of any situation where you might cd to the directory containing a file, whose path is supplied by the user). Therefore, it doesn't have to have some specific use: as long as it fulfills the usual semantics of cd <some-path>, it is useful.






                    share|improve this answer
























                    • Agreed, . should be treated as a valid path specified by cd syntax just fine.

                      – Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
                      1 hour ago














                    1












                    1








                    1







                    I think this is overthinking the problem. cd . may not be something that one would manually run in the usual course of things, but it definitely is something that can come up in programmatic execution (think of any situation where you might cd to the directory containing a file, whose path is supplied by the user). Therefore, it doesn't have to have some specific use: as long as it fulfills the usual semantics of cd <some-path>, it is useful.






                    share|improve this answer













                    I think this is overthinking the problem. cd . may not be something that one would manually run in the usual course of things, but it definitely is something that can come up in programmatic execution (think of any situation where you might cd to the directory containing a file, whose path is supplied by the user). Therefore, it doesn't have to have some specific use: as long as it fulfills the usual semantics of cd <some-path>, it is useful.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered 1 hour ago









                    OlorinOlorin

                    1,789313




                    1,789313













                    • Agreed, . should be treated as a valid path specified by cd syntax just fine.

                      – Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
                      1 hour ago



















                    • Agreed, . should be treated as a valid path specified by cd syntax just fine.

                      – Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
                      1 hour ago

















                    Agreed, . should be treated as a valid path specified by cd syntax just fine.

                    – Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
                    1 hour ago





                    Agreed, . should be treated as a valid path specified by cd syntax just fine.

                    – Sergiy Kolodyazhnyy
                    1 hour ago


















                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


                    • 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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f495899%2fdoes-cd-have-use%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    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







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    How to label and detect the document text images

                    Image
                    1 $begingroup$ This is what I mean as document text image: I want to label the texts in image as separate blocks and my model should detect these labels as classes. NOTE: This is how the end result should be like: The labels like Block 1, Block 2, Block 3,.. should be Logo, Title, Date,.. Others, etc. Work done: First approach : I tried to implement this method via Object Detection, it didn't work. It didn't even detect any text. Second approach : Then I tried it using PixelLink. As this model is build for scene text detection, it detected each and every text in the image. But this method can detect multiple lines of text if the threshold values are increased. But I have no idea how do I add labels to the text blocks. PIXEL_CLS_WEIGHT_all_ones = 'PIXEL_CLS_WEIGHT_all_ones' PIXEL_C...
                    Read more

                    Vallis Paradisi

                    Image
                    Coordinata: .mw-parser-output .geo-default,.mw-parser-output .geo-dms,.mw-parser-output .geo-dec{display:inline}.mw-parser-output .geo-nondefault,.mw-parser-output .geo-multi-punct{display:none}.mw-parser-output .longitude,.mw-parser-output .latitude{white-space:nowrap} 33°03′S 71°37′W  /  33.05°S 71.617°W  / -33.05; -71.617 Vallis Paradisi Res apud Vicidata repertae: Civitas : Chilia Numerus incolarum : 296 655 Zona horaria : UTC-4 Situs interretialis Nomen officiale : Valparaíso Gubernium Consilium : municipal council of Valparaíso Geographia Superficies : 401 600 000 Metrum quadratum Coniunctiones urbium Urbes gemellae : Ovetum , Badalona , Santa Fe , Ora longa , Sciamhaevum , Quantunia , Callao , Bat Yam , Melaka , Novorossiysk , Busan , Corduba , Odessa , Rosario , Malacca , Barcino , Soteropolis , Franciscopolis (California) , Guanajuato, Silao Tabula aut despectus Despectus in portum sinumque et urbem Vallis Paradisi Vallis Para...
                    Read more

                    Tabula Rosettana

                    Image
                    Tabula multilinguis Rosettana in Museo Britannico ostenditur. Tabula Rosettana, [1] etiam titulo OGIS 90 agnita, est stela decreto de rebus sacris in Aegypto anno 196 a.C.n. lato inscripta. Tabula iuxta Rosettam Aegypti, urbem in delta Nili et ad oram maris Mediterranei iacentem, anno 1799 a milite Francico reperta est. Inventio stelae, linguis duabus scripturisque tribus inscriptae, eruditis Instituti Aegypti statim nuntiata est; ibi enim iussu imperatoris Napoleonis eruditi omnium scientiarum (sub aegide Commissionis Scientiarum et Artium) properaverant cum expeditione Francica. Qua a Britannis mox debellata, tabula Rosettana Londinium missa hodie apud Museum Britannicum iacet. Textus Graecus cito lectus interpretationi textuum Aegyptiorum (in formis hieroglyphica et demotica expressorum) gradatim adiuvit. Denique textum plene interpretatus est Ioannes Franciscus Champollion. Ab opere eruditorum cumulativo coepit hodiernus scripturae hieroglyphicae linguaeque Aegyptiae a...
                    Read more