Linux equivalent for «cmd /C start "Title" "C:\Folder\file.bat"»

Question

I have a Java program that runs a batch file on Windows with Runtime.getRuntime().exec() using the following command:

cmd /C start "Title" "C:\Folder\file.bat"

The Java program ends quickly since cmd /C carries out the command and then terminates ⁽¹⁾ and start "Title" "C:\Folder\file.bat" starts the batch script ⁽²⁾. Thus the process (the batch file) will continue running independently.

Now, suppose that I have an shell script (e.g. file.sh), which I want to launch from Java and has a similar behavior. How could it be the equivalent command ⁽³⁾ in Linux?

---

Notes

1. See CMD.exe (Command Shell) | Windows CMD | SS64.com
2. See Start - Start a program | Windows CMD | SS64.com
3. The title ("Title") is not required.

Answer 1

The way to launch a script is to give its path:

/path/to/script.sh

To have it continue if the parent process exits, you can just launch it in the background by appending &:

/path/to/script.sh &

So, if you have, for example, one script calling another like so:

#!/bin/bash
script2.sh &

You could run script1.sh which will call script2.sh and, because it is sent to the background, exit immediately.

Answer 2

You have many options, the more interesting are these:

• If it's for Ubuntu, you can use gnome-terminal:

  gnome-terminal -c "/home/$USER/file.sh" -t "Title"
  

  or:

  gnome-terminal -- "/home/$USER/file.sh" -t "Title"
  

• If do you want to make it compatible with most linux, you can use xterm:

  xterm -T "Title" -e "/home/$USER/file.sh"
  

The path is /home/$USER/file.sh (Windows 7 equivalent: C:\Users\%UserProfile%\file.bat)

The file.sh contents may be something like this:

#!/bin/bash

echo "In a World without Walls nor Fences, the people don't need Windows and Gates"
sleep 2

Answer 3

Various ways to execute a script in Linux: my arbitrary script name is foo.bat

ex1:$bash foo.bat

ex2:$./foo.bat

ex3:$echo $(~/Desktop/foo.bat)

ex4:`~/Desktop/foo.bat`

ex5:$ /path/to/shell/script/foo.bat

ex1: this is is just a regular file at this point, we execute it with bash
ex2: we have marked foo.bat as executable. ($chmod +x foo.bat)
ex3: Command substitution 
ex4: execute using "``"
ex5: we us the path to the executable.

These are the most common. I would avoid calling things like gnome-terminal, and xterm. These are less common shells compared to things like bash, and sh. For example I use Ubuntu mate. I have neither xterm nor gnome-terminal. But, I do have bash, and sh. as does nearly ever other person running Linux / mac osx.

You may appreciate this tutorial on script execution here

the script foo.bat does this:

$ ./foo.bat
Having a bash ./foo.bat

where its contents are:

$ cat foo.bat 
#!/bin/bash
echo -e "Having a bash" $0

I think the use of $0 can give you the title functionality you may desire. Many more possibilities exist.

Answer 4

As I understand, you want to run an external command from within Java, and have the Java process continue (asynchronously) whilst that external command continues to run too?

Here's a little test I whipped up:

[tai@flenux runproc ] $ ls
filecreator.sh  ProcRunner.class  ProcRunner.java

[tai@flenux runproc ] $ cat filecreator.sh 
touch newfile

[tai@flenux runproc ] $ cat ProcRunner.java 

public class ProcRunner {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        try {
            Runtime.getRuntime().exec(args);
            Thread.sleep(2000);
            System.out.println("Done");
        } catch(Exception e) {
            System.err.println(e.toString() );
        }
    }
}

[tai@flenux runproc ] $ java ProcRunner bash filecreator.sh 
Done

[tai@flenux runproc ] $ ls
filecreator.sh  newfile  ProcRunner.class  ProcRunner.java

[tai@flenux runproc ] $ 

Java successfully execs the program (which simply creates the "newfile" file) ; it also continues on its own merry way to print the Done message after calling the exec.

If you wanted a terminal window to open too, prefix the call string

Runtime.getRuntime().exec(["gnome-terminal", "-e"]+args);

So to answer your question, it looks like you would just call the method you specified. Are you getting a different behaviour?