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

                    Accessing regular linux commands in Huawei's Dopra Linux

                    Image
                    4 Backstory: I have a Huawei HG8245 router in my house and I want to change the default username/password. I've tried following this guide but the config file always gets reset. My ISP isn't helping either so I'm looking for other ways to accomplish this. The router has telnet access so this seems like a way to change the credentials. The first shell I gain access to looks like this: WAP> Pressing "?" gives me a list of available commands which I've pasted here, the two interesting ones are "su" and "shell". I can't seem to get su access, even after logging in as root (challenge password prompt, and then nothing happens), but shell gives me a proper linux shell. WAP>shell BusyBox v1.18.4 (2017-12-26 17:06:34 CST) built-in shell (ash) Enter 'hel...
                    Read more

                    Can't connect RFCOMM socket: Host is down

                    Image
                    up vote 3 down vote favorite I have bluez 5.4.3 and I am attempting to communicate with a ble device through minicom. These two deceives (my computer and a bluno nano) are alreadt paired and this has been my method so far. #bluetoothctl # pair xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx # exit Everything is working well so far then... #sudo rfcomm connect /dev/rfcomm0 xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx 1 & [1] 3665 Can't connect RFCOMM socket: Host is down Does anyone know how to resolve this issue? Any help would be very much appreciated. bluetooth bluez share | improve this question asked Feb 9 '17 at 18:46 Brandon Knape 46 2 ...
                    Read more

                    Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal Exception in Interrupt

                    Image
                    0 Every day this error occured on my pc, kernel panic error on interrupt, what will be the problem? linux-mint share asked 6 mins ago Vinod Selvin Vinod Selvin 1 1 New contributor Vinod Selvin is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct. add a comment ...
                    Read more