Why pwd does not accept long options like --physical?

When I display the manual for pwd command, it says that long options like --physical are supported

$ man pwd

PWD(1)                           User Commands                          PWD(1)



NAME

       pwd - print name of current/working directory



SYNOPSIS

       pwd [OPTION]...



DESCRIPTION

       Print the full filename of the current working directory.



       -L, --logical

              use PWD from environment, even if it contains symlinks



       -P, --physical

              avoid all symlinks

However, it fails when I type the following

$ pwd --physical

-bash: pwd: --: invalid option

pwd: usage: pwd [-LP]

Why are long options not working for me?

I'm using RHEL 6.4. No alias for pwd is configured. Looks like it's standard pwd:

$ which pwd

/bin/pwd

edited Jan 21 at 15:13

wjandrea

478413

asked Jan 21 at 13:47

Michal Kordas

1668

1

The manual page is for a standalone utility which is not part of bash.

– Thomas Dickey
Jan 21 at 13:50

7

Use type instead of which, since which only shows commands, while type shows keywords, builtins, aliases, functions, and commands (and hashed command paths). For more details see Why not use “which”? What to use then?

– wjandrea
Jan 21 at 14:45

1

In my system man pwd has following note: your shell may have its own version of pwd, which usually supersedes the version described here. Please refer to your shell's documentation for details about the options it supports at the bottom of DESCRIPTION section.

– Nykakin
Jan 22 at 14:18

add a comment |

When I display the manual for pwd command, it says that long options like --physical are supported

$ man pwd

PWD(1)                           User Commands                          PWD(1)



NAME

       pwd - print name of current/working directory



SYNOPSIS

       pwd [OPTION]...



DESCRIPTION

       Print the full filename of the current working directory.



       -L, --logical

              use PWD from environment, even if it contains symlinks



       -P, --physical

              avoid all symlinks

However, it fails when I type the following

$ pwd --physical

-bash: pwd: --: invalid option

pwd: usage: pwd [-LP]

Why are long options not working for me?

I'm using RHEL 6.4. No alias for pwd is configured. Looks like it's standard pwd:

$ which pwd

/bin/pwd

edited Jan 21 at 15:13

wjandrea

478413

asked Jan 21 at 13:47

Michal Kordas

1668

1

The manual page is for a standalone utility which is not part of bash.

– Thomas Dickey
Jan 21 at 13:50

7

Use type instead of which, since which only shows commands, while type shows keywords, builtins, aliases, functions, and commands (and hashed command paths). For more details see Why not use “which”? What to use then?

– wjandrea
Jan 21 at 14:45

1

In my system man pwd has following note: your shell may have its own version of pwd, which usually supersedes the version described here. Please refer to your shell's documentation for details about the options it supports at the bottom of DESCRIPTION section.

– Nykakin
Jan 22 at 14:18

add a comment |

When I display the manual for pwd command, it says that long options like --physical are supported

$ man pwd

PWD(1)                           User Commands                          PWD(1)



NAME

       pwd - print name of current/working directory



SYNOPSIS

       pwd [OPTION]...



DESCRIPTION

       Print the full filename of the current working directory.



       -L, --logical

              use PWD from environment, even if it contains symlinks



       -P, --physical

              avoid all symlinks

However, it fails when I type the following

$ pwd --physical

-bash: pwd: --: invalid option

pwd: usage: pwd [-LP]

Why are long options not working for me?

I'm using RHEL 6.4. No alias for pwd is configured. Looks like it's standard pwd:

$ which pwd

/bin/pwd

edited Jan 21 at 15:13

wjandrea

478413

asked Jan 21 at 13:47

Michal Kordas

1668

When I display the manual for pwd command, it says that long options like --physical are supported

$ man pwd

PWD(1)                           User Commands                          PWD(1)



NAME

       pwd - print name of current/working directory



SYNOPSIS

       pwd [OPTION]...



DESCRIPTION

       Print the full filename of the current working directory.



       -L, --logical

              use PWD from environment, even if it contains symlinks



       -P, --physical

              avoid all symlinks

However, it fails when I type the following

$ pwd --physical

-bash: pwd: --: invalid option

pwd: usage: pwd [-LP]

Why are long options not working for me?

I'm using RHEL 6.4. No alias for pwd is configured. Looks like it's standard pwd:

$ which pwd

/bin/pwd

bash rhel pwd

edited Jan 21 at 15:13

wjandrea

478413

asked Jan 21 at 13:47

Michal Kordas

1668

edited Jan 21 at 15:13

wjandrea

478413

asked Jan 21 at 13:47

Michal Kordas

1668

edited Jan 21 at 15:13

wjandrea

478413

edited Jan 21 at 15:13

wjandrea

478413

edited Jan 21 at 15:13

wjandrea

478413

asked Jan 21 at 13:47

Michal Kordas

1668

asked Jan 21 at 13:47

Michal Kordas

1668

asked Jan 21 at 13:47

Michal Kordas

1668

1

The manual page is for a standalone utility which is not part of bash.

– Thomas Dickey
Jan 21 at 13:50

7

Use type instead of which, since which only shows commands, while type shows keywords, builtins, aliases, functions, and commands (and hashed command paths). For more details see Why not use “which”? What to use then?

– wjandrea
Jan 21 at 14:45

1

In my system man pwd has following note: your shell may have its own version of pwd, which usually supersedes the version described here. Please refer to your shell's documentation for details about the options it supports at the bottom of DESCRIPTION section.

– Nykakin
Jan 22 at 14:18

add a comment |

1

The manual page is for a standalone utility which is not part of bash.

– Thomas Dickey
Jan 21 at 13:50

7

Use type instead of which, since which only shows commands, while type shows keywords, builtins, aliases, functions, and commands (and hashed command paths). For more details see Why not use “which”? What to use then?

– wjandrea
Jan 21 at 14:45

1

In my system man pwd has following note: your shell may have its own version of pwd, which usually supersedes the version described here. Please refer to your shell's documentation for details about the options it supports at the bottom of DESCRIPTION section.

– Nykakin
Jan 22 at 14:18

The manual page is for a standalone utility which is not part of bash.

– Thomas Dickey
Jan 21 at 13:50

Use type instead of which, since which only shows commands, while type shows keywords, builtins, aliases, functions, and commands (and hashed command paths). For more details see Why not use “which”? What to use then?

– wjandrea
Jan 21 at 14:45

In my system man pwd has following note:

your shell may have its own version of pwd, which usually supersedes the version described here.  Please refer to your  shell's  documentation for details about the options it supports

at the bottom of DESCRIPTION section.

– Nykakin
Jan 22 at 14:18

In my system man pwd has following note:

your shell may have its own version of pwd, which usually supersedes the version described here.  Please refer to your  shell's  documentation for details about the options it supports

at the bottom of DESCRIPTION section.

– Nykakin
Jan 22 at 14:18

add a comment |

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

bash has a built-in command pwd which is what you are using when you simply type pwd into your shell.

To get the pwd as described by the manpage, you need force use of the external command. You can do this by specifying the full path to the executable (/bin/pwd in your case) or by prepending env before the line: env pwd, which starts the env command which can be used to add settings to the environment (but which is not done here) and then env starts the command specified. As env doesn't have a builtin pwd, the "real" /bin/pwd is executed.

The advantage of the builtin pwd in bash is that bash keeps track of the current directory, so getting the value is at zero cost, whereas the external command needs to search up through the filesystem to determine the path, which is much more IO intensive.

answered Jan 21 at 13:52

wurtel

10.4k11526

4

That's not how the external command actually works. unix.stackexchange.com/a/413225/5132

– JdeBP
Jan 21 at 16:59

BTW: You can also disable the shell builtin (at least in bash) by enable -n pwd

– derobert
Jan 21 at 20:18

@JdeBP It used to be last time I looked (a long time ago :-) ); and whereas it now uses the getcwd() system call, the kernel still traverses the filesystem, which is easier to do in kernel space due to access to relevant data structures, As the linked answer states: "However, note that even on FreeBSD and those other operating systems the kernel does not keep track of the working directory with a string."

– wurtel
Jan 22 at 9:03

add a comment |

That manpage documents /bin/pwd, but when you run pwd you’re using the shell built-in; see the output of

type pwd

Your shell’s built-in pwd doesn’t support long options (see your shell’s documentation; since you’re using Bash, help pwd will provide a summary).

edited Jan 21 at 14:56

answered Jan 21 at 13:50

Stephen Kitt

168k24379457

add a comment |

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

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f495790%2fwhy-pwd-does-not-accept-long-options-like-physical%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

bash has a built-in command pwd which is what you are using when you simply type pwd into your shell.

answered Jan 21 at 13:52

wurtel

10.4k11526

4

That's not how the external command actually works. unix.stackexchange.com/a/413225/5132

– JdeBP
Jan 21 at 16:59

BTW: You can also disable the shell builtin (at least in bash) by enable -n pwd

– derobert
Jan 21 at 20:18

@JdeBP It used to be last time I looked (a long time ago :-) ); and whereas it now uses the getcwd() system call, the kernel still traverses the filesystem, which is easier to do in kernel space due to access to relevant data structures, As the linked answer states: "However, note that even on FreeBSD and those other operating systems the kernel does not keep track of the working directory with a string."

– wurtel
Jan 22 at 9:03

add a comment |

bash has a built-in command pwd which is what you are using when you simply type pwd into your shell.

answered Jan 21 at 13:52

wurtel

10.4k11526

4

That's not how the external command actually works. unix.stackexchange.com/a/413225/5132

– JdeBP
Jan 21 at 16:59

BTW: You can also disable the shell builtin (at least in bash) by enable -n pwd

– derobert
Jan 21 at 20:18

@JdeBP It used to be last time I looked (a long time ago :-) ); and whereas it now uses the getcwd() system call, the kernel still traverses the filesystem, which is easier to do in kernel space due to access to relevant data structures, As the linked answer states: "However, note that even on FreeBSD and those other operating systems the kernel does not keep track of the working directory with a string."

– wurtel
Jan 22 at 9:03

add a comment |

bash has a built-in command pwd which is what you are using when you simply type pwd into your shell.

answered Jan 21 at 13:52

wurtel

10.4k11526

bash has a built-in command pwd which is what you are using when you simply type pwd into your shell.

answered Jan 21 at 13:52

wurtel

10.4k11526

answered Jan 21 at 13:52

wurtel

10.4k11526

answered Jan 21 at 13:52

wurtel

10.4k11526

answered Jan 21 at 13:52

wurtel

10.4k11526

4

That's not how the external command actually works. unix.stackexchange.com/a/413225/5132

– JdeBP
Jan 21 at 16:59

BTW: You can also disable the shell builtin (at least in bash) by enable -n pwd

– derobert
Jan 21 at 20:18

@JdeBP It used to be last time I looked (a long time ago :-) ); and whereas it now uses the getcwd() system call, the kernel still traverses the filesystem, which is easier to do in kernel space due to access to relevant data structures, As the linked answer states: "However, note that even on FreeBSD and those other operating systems the kernel does not keep track of the working directory with a string."

– wurtel
Jan 22 at 9:03

add a comment |

4

That's not how the external command actually works. unix.stackexchange.com/a/413225/5132

– JdeBP
Jan 21 at 16:59

BTW: You can also disable the shell builtin (at least in bash) by enable -n pwd

– derobert
Jan 21 at 20:18

@JdeBP It used to be last time I looked (a long time ago :-) ); and whereas it now uses the getcwd() system call, the kernel still traverses the filesystem, which is easier to do in kernel space due to access to relevant data structures, As the linked answer states: "However, note that even on FreeBSD and those other operating systems the kernel does not keep track of the working directory with a string."

– wurtel
Jan 22 at 9:03

That's not how the external command actually works. unix.stackexchange.com/a/413225/5132

– JdeBP
Jan 21 at 16:59

BTW: You can also disable the shell builtin (at least in bash) by enable -n pwd

– derobert
Jan 21 at 20:18

@JdeBP It used to be last time I looked (a long time ago :-) ); and whereas it now uses the getcwd() system call, the kernel still traverses the filesystem, which is easier to do in kernel space due to access to relevant data structures, As the linked answer states: "However, note that even on FreeBSD and those other operating systems the kernel does not keep track of the working directory with a string."

– wurtel
Jan 22 at 9:03

add a comment |

That manpage documents /bin/pwd, but when you run pwd you’re using the shell built-in; see the output of

type pwd

Your shell’s built-in pwd doesn’t support long options (see your shell’s documentation; since you’re using Bash, help pwd will provide a summary).

edited Jan 21 at 14:56

answered Jan 21 at 13:50

Stephen Kitt

168k24379457

add a comment |

That manpage documents /bin/pwd, but when you run pwd you’re using the shell built-in; see the output of

type pwd

Your shell’s built-in pwd doesn’t support long options (see your shell’s documentation; since you’re using Bash, help pwd will provide a summary).

edited Jan 21 at 14:56

answered Jan 21 at 13:50

Stephen Kitt

168k24379457

add a comment |

That manpage documents /bin/pwd, but when you run pwd you’re using the shell built-in; see the output of

type pwd

Your shell’s built-in pwd doesn’t support long options (see your shell’s documentation; since you’re using Bash, help pwd will provide a summary).

edited Jan 21 at 14:56

answered Jan 21 at 13:50

Stephen Kitt

168k24379457

That manpage documents /bin/pwd, but when you run pwd you’re using the shell built-in; see the output of

type pwd

Your shell’s built-in pwd doesn’t support long options (see your shell’s documentation; since you’re using Bash, help pwd will provide a summary).

edited Jan 21 at 14:56

answered Jan 21 at 13:50

Stephen Kitt

168k24379457

edited Jan 21 at 14:56

answered Jan 21 at 13:50

Stephen Kitt

168k24379457

answered Jan 21 at 13:50

Stephen Kitt

168k24379457

answered Jan 21 at 13:50

Stephen Kitt

168k24379457

add a comment |

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

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

This page is only for reference, If you need detailed information, please check here

搜尋此網誌

Mfrhtyj