apt install
This looks good:
for i in package1 package2 package3; do
sudo apt-get install -y $i
done
but with the packages listed in a file:
package1
package2
..
each on its own line. Looking for simplest script to read, performance not really an issue. Of course, the odd package will require some human intervention during install to agree or for configuration.
As an aside, what's the "real" way of dealing with large lists of packages to be installed? I'm just looking for monkey-see-monkey-do.
apt bash package-management software-installation automation
add a comment |
This looks good:
for i in package1 package2 package3; do
sudo apt-get install -y $i
done
but with the packages listed in a file:
package1
package2
..
each on its own line. Looking for simplest script to read, performance not really an issue. Of course, the odd package will require some human intervention during install to agree or for configuration.
As an aside, what's the "real" way of dealing with large lists of packages to be installed? I'm just looking for monkey-see-monkey-do.
apt bash package-management software-installation automation
I don't really understand your question, you could read from the file and run the apt command on each read line!
– George Udosen
52 mins ago
LOL, yes, exactly. How? (I'll google that, also, of course.)
– Thufir
50 mins ago
add a comment |
This looks good:
for i in package1 package2 package3; do
sudo apt-get install -y $i
done
but with the packages listed in a file:
package1
package2
..
each on its own line. Looking for simplest script to read, performance not really an issue. Of course, the odd package will require some human intervention during install to agree or for configuration.
As an aside, what's the "real" way of dealing with large lists of packages to be installed? I'm just looking for monkey-see-monkey-do.
apt bash package-management software-installation automation
This looks good:
for i in package1 package2 package3; do
sudo apt-get install -y $i
done
but with the packages listed in a file:
package1
package2
..
each on its own line. Looking for simplest script to read, performance not really an issue. Of course, the odd package will require some human intervention during install to agree or for configuration.
As an aside, what's the "real" way of dealing with large lists of packages to be installed? I'm just looking for monkey-see-monkey-do.
apt bash package-management software-installation automation
apt bash package-management software-installation automation
edited 39 mins ago
asked 1 hour ago
Thufir
1,51284394
1,51284394
I don't really understand your question, you could read from the file and run the apt command on each read line!
– George Udosen
52 mins ago
LOL, yes, exactly. How? (I'll google that, also, of course.)
– Thufir
50 mins ago
add a comment |
I don't really understand your question, you could read from the file and run the apt command on each read line!
– George Udosen
52 mins ago
LOL, yes, exactly. How? (I'll google that, also, of course.)
– Thufir
50 mins ago
I don't really understand your question, you could read from the file and run the apt command on each read line!
– George Udosen
52 mins ago
I don't really understand your question, you could read from the file and run the apt command on each read line!
– George Udosen
52 mins ago
LOL, yes, exactly. How? (I'll google that, also, of course.)
– Thufir
50 mins ago
LOL, yes, exactly. How? (I'll google that, also, of course.)
– Thufir
50 mins ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
There is the xargs
program which transforms a file to command-line arguments. Simply prepend xargs
to the command (with all arguments) for which you’d like to supply additional arguments from the file (let’s call it list.txt
) and let xargs
to read your file using standard input redirection.
< list.txt xargs sudo apt-get install -y
You can test it by putting echo
before (or instead of) sudo
or removing the -y
option.
but can you make it simpler for this monkey?
– Thufir
22 mins ago
1
I am sorry, I don’t think there is any way to make this command simpler. Every character in this command has its own purpose. The only thing I can simplify is to writeapt
instead ofapt-get
.
– Melebius
19 mins ago
I know -- I was kidding. But, thanks.
– Thufir
18 mins ago
add a comment |
Something like this?
# check that the filename was supplied (keeping it simple for the example)
set -o nounset
packagefile=$1
# initialize the package variable
packages=''
# read the lines of the package file
while IFS= read -r line; do
packs+=" $line"
done < $packagefile
# apt install all of the packages
apt install -y $packs
yes, perfect thanks. As an aside, is it possible or advisable to pipeapt search
output through a script or utility? Assuming you know ahead of time that the result set is limited. You already answered the question I asked, it's just an aside.
– Thufir
47 mins ago
1
You can pipe the output but IMO that's really asking for it since you could get many matches that you didn't intend. I'd recommend outputing to a file first (like: apt search some-pack_name > packages) and then editing that file before doing the install.
– Eric Mintz
28 mins ago
It's the editing which is annoying.
– Thufir
23 mins ago
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',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
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%2f1106268%2fapt-install-list-of-packages-from-file%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
There is the xargs
program which transforms a file to command-line arguments. Simply prepend xargs
to the command (with all arguments) for which you’d like to supply additional arguments from the file (let’s call it list.txt
) and let xargs
to read your file using standard input redirection.
< list.txt xargs sudo apt-get install -y
You can test it by putting echo
before (or instead of) sudo
or removing the -y
option.
but can you make it simpler for this monkey?
– Thufir
22 mins ago
1
I am sorry, I don’t think there is any way to make this command simpler. Every character in this command has its own purpose. The only thing I can simplify is to writeapt
instead ofapt-get
.
– Melebius
19 mins ago
I know -- I was kidding. But, thanks.
– Thufir
18 mins ago
add a comment |
There is the xargs
program which transforms a file to command-line arguments. Simply prepend xargs
to the command (with all arguments) for which you’d like to supply additional arguments from the file (let’s call it list.txt
) and let xargs
to read your file using standard input redirection.
< list.txt xargs sudo apt-get install -y
You can test it by putting echo
before (or instead of) sudo
or removing the -y
option.
but can you make it simpler for this monkey?
– Thufir
22 mins ago
1
I am sorry, I don’t think there is any way to make this command simpler. Every character in this command has its own purpose. The only thing I can simplify is to writeapt
instead ofapt-get
.
– Melebius
19 mins ago
I know -- I was kidding. But, thanks.
– Thufir
18 mins ago
add a comment |
There is the xargs
program which transforms a file to command-line arguments. Simply prepend xargs
to the command (with all arguments) for which you’d like to supply additional arguments from the file (let’s call it list.txt
) and let xargs
to read your file using standard input redirection.
< list.txt xargs sudo apt-get install -y
You can test it by putting echo
before (or instead of) sudo
or removing the -y
option.
There is the xargs
program which transforms a file to command-line arguments. Simply prepend xargs
to the command (with all arguments) for which you’d like to supply additional arguments from the file (let’s call it list.txt
) and let xargs
to read your file using standard input redirection.
< list.txt xargs sudo apt-get install -y
You can test it by putting echo
before (or instead of) sudo
or removing the -y
option.
edited 24 mins ago
answered 29 mins ago
Melebius
4,41751838
4,41751838
but can you make it simpler for this monkey?
– Thufir
22 mins ago
1
I am sorry, I don’t think there is any way to make this command simpler. Every character in this command has its own purpose. The only thing I can simplify is to writeapt
instead ofapt-get
.
– Melebius
19 mins ago
I know -- I was kidding. But, thanks.
– Thufir
18 mins ago
add a comment |
but can you make it simpler for this monkey?
– Thufir
22 mins ago
1
I am sorry, I don’t think there is any way to make this command simpler. Every character in this command has its own purpose. The only thing I can simplify is to writeapt
instead ofapt-get
.
– Melebius
19 mins ago
I know -- I was kidding. But, thanks.
– Thufir
18 mins ago
but can you make it simpler for this monkey?
– Thufir
22 mins ago
but can you make it simpler for this monkey?
– Thufir
22 mins ago
1
1
I am sorry, I don’t think there is any way to make this command simpler. Every character in this command has its own purpose. The only thing I can simplify is to write
apt
instead of apt-get
.– Melebius
19 mins ago
I am sorry, I don’t think there is any way to make this command simpler. Every character in this command has its own purpose. The only thing I can simplify is to write
apt
instead of apt-get
.– Melebius
19 mins ago
I know -- I was kidding. But, thanks.
– Thufir
18 mins ago
I know -- I was kidding. But, thanks.
– Thufir
18 mins ago
add a comment |
Something like this?
# check that the filename was supplied (keeping it simple for the example)
set -o nounset
packagefile=$1
# initialize the package variable
packages=''
# read the lines of the package file
while IFS= read -r line; do
packs+=" $line"
done < $packagefile
# apt install all of the packages
apt install -y $packs
yes, perfect thanks. As an aside, is it possible or advisable to pipeapt search
output through a script or utility? Assuming you know ahead of time that the result set is limited. You already answered the question I asked, it's just an aside.
– Thufir
47 mins ago
1
You can pipe the output but IMO that's really asking for it since you could get many matches that you didn't intend. I'd recommend outputing to a file first (like: apt search some-pack_name > packages) and then editing that file before doing the install.
– Eric Mintz
28 mins ago
It's the editing which is annoying.
– Thufir
23 mins ago
add a comment |
Something like this?
# check that the filename was supplied (keeping it simple for the example)
set -o nounset
packagefile=$1
# initialize the package variable
packages=''
# read the lines of the package file
while IFS= read -r line; do
packs+=" $line"
done < $packagefile
# apt install all of the packages
apt install -y $packs
yes, perfect thanks. As an aside, is it possible or advisable to pipeapt search
output through a script or utility? Assuming you know ahead of time that the result set is limited. You already answered the question I asked, it's just an aside.
– Thufir
47 mins ago
1
You can pipe the output but IMO that's really asking for it since you could get many matches that you didn't intend. I'd recommend outputing to a file first (like: apt search some-pack_name > packages) and then editing that file before doing the install.
– Eric Mintz
28 mins ago
It's the editing which is annoying.
– Thufir
23 mins ago
add a comment |
Something like this?
# check that the filename was supplied (keeping it simple for the example)
set -o nounset
packagefile=$1
# initialize the package variable
packages=''
# read the lines of the package file
while IFS= read -r line; do
packs+=" $line"
done < $packagefile
# apt install all of the packages
apt install -y $packs
Something like this?
# check that the filename was supplied (keeping it simple for the example)
set -o nounset
packagefile=$1
# initialize the package variable
packages=''
# read the lines of the package file
while IFS= read -r line; do
packs+=" $line"
done < $packagefile
# apt install all of the packages
apt install -y $packs
answered 48 mins ago
Eric Mintz
484112
484112
yes, perfect thanks. As an aside, is it possible or advisable to pipeapt search
output through a script or utility? Assuming you know ahead of time that the result set is limited. You already answered the question I asked, it's just an aside.
– Thufir
47 mins ago
1
You can pipe the output but IMO that's really asking for it since you could get many matches that you didn't intend. I'd recommend outputing to a file first (like: apt search some-pack_name > packages) and then editing that file before doing the install.
– Eric Mintz
28 mins ago
It's the editing which is annoying.
– Thufir
23 mins ago
add a comment |
yes, perfect thanks. As an aside, is it possible or advisable to pipeapt search
output through a script or utility? Assuming you know ahead of time that the result set is limited. You already answered the question I asked, it's just an aside.
– Thufir
47 mins ago
1
You can pipe the output but IMO that's really asking for it since you could get many matches that you didn't intend. I'd recommend outputing to a file first (like: apt search some-pack_name > packages) and then editing that file before doing the install.
– Eric Mintz
28 mins ago
It's the editing which is annoying.
– Thufir
23 mins ago
yes, perfect thanks. As an aside, is it possible or advisable to pipe
apt search
output through a script or utility? Assuming you know ahead of time that the result set is limited. You already answered the question I asked, it's just an aside.– Thufir
47 mins ago
yes, perfect thanks. As an aside, is it possible or advisable to pipe
apt search
output through a script or utility? Assuming you know ahead of time that the result set is limited. You already answered the question I asked, it's just an aside.– Thufir
47 mins ago
1
1
You can pipe the output but IMO that's really asking for it since you could get many matches that you didn't intend. I'd recommend outputing to a file first (like: apt search some-pack_name > packages) and then editing that file before doing the install.
– Eric Mintz
28 mins ago
You can pipe the output but IMO that's really asking for it since you could get many matches that you didn't intend. I'd recommend outputing to a file first (like: apt search some-pack_name > packages) and then editing that file before doing the install.
– Eric Mintz
28 mins ago
It's the editing which is annoying.
– Thufir
23 mins ago
It's the editing which is annoying.
– Thufir
23 mins ago
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%2f1106268%2fapt-install-list-of-packages-from-file%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
I don't really understand your question, you could read from the file and run the apt command on each read line!
– George Udosen
52 mins ago
LOL, yes, exactly. How? (I'll google that, also, of course.)
– Thufir
50 mins ago