在脚本的开头添加这一行

[ "${FLOCKER}" != "$0" ] && exec env FLOCKER="$0" flock -en "$0" "$0" "$@" || :

这是人类群体的样板代码。

如果需要更多的日志记录，可以使用这个

[ "${FLOCKER}" != "$0" ] && { echo "Trying to start build from queue... "; exec bash -c "FLOCKER='$0' flock -E $E_LOCKED -en '$0' '$0' '$@' || if [ \"\$?\" -eq $E_LOCKED ]; then echo 'Locked.'; fi"; } || echo "Lock is free. Completing."

使用flock工具设置和检查锁。 这段代码通过检查FLOCKER变量来检测它是否第一次运行，如果它没有设置为脚本名称，那么它会尝试再次递归地使用flock启动脚本，并初始化FLOCKER变量，如果FLOCKER设置正确，那么在前一次迭代中flock成功，可以继续。如果锁繁忙，它将失败，并使用可配置的退出代码。

它似乎不能在Debian 7上工作，但似乎可以在实验util-linux 2.25包上再次工作。上面写着“羊群:……文本文件繁忙”。可以通过禁用脚本上的写权限来覆盖它。

又快又脏?

#!/bin/sh

if [ -f sometempfile ]
  echo "Already running... will now terminate."
  exit
else
  touch sometempfile
fi

..do what you want here..

rm sometempfile

if [ 1 -ne $(/bin/fuser "$0" 2>/dev/null | wc -w) ]; then
    exit 1
fi

我对现有的答案有以下问题:

Some answers try to clean up lock files and then having to deal with stale lock files caused by e.g. sudden crash/reboot. IMO that is unnecessarily complicated. Let lock files stay. Some answers use script file itself $0 or $BASH_SOURCE for locking often referring to examples from man flock. This fails when script is replaced due to update or edit causing next run to open and obtain lock on the new script file even though another instance holding a lock on the removed file is still running. Few answers use a fixed file descriptor. This is not ideal. I do not want to rely on how this will behave e.g. opening lock file fails but gets mishandled and attempts to lock on unrelated file descriptor inherited from parent process. Another fail case is injecting locking wrapper for a 3rd party binary that does not handle locking itself but fixed file descriptors can interfere with file descriptor passing to child processes. I reject answers using process lookup for already running script name. There are several reasons for it, such as but not limited to reliability/atomicity, parsing output, and having script that does several related functions some of which do not require locking.

这个答案是:

rely on flock because it gets kernel to provide locking ... provided lock file is created atomically and not replaced. assume and rely on lock file being stored on the local filesystem as opposed to NFS. change lock file presence to NOT mean anything about a running instance. Its role is purely to prevent two concurrent instances creating file with same name and replacing another's copy. Lock file does not get deleted, it gets left behind and can survive across reboots. The locking is indicated via flock not via lock file presence. assume bash shell, as tagged by the question.

它不是一个联机程序，但是没有注释和错误消息，它足够小:

#!/bin/bash

LOCKFILE=/var/lock/TODO

set -o noclobber
exec {lockfd}<> "${LOCKFILE}" || exit 1
set +o noclobber # depends on what you need
flock --exclusive --nonblock ${lockfd} || exit 1

但我更喜欢注释和错误消息:

#!/bin/bash

# TODO Set a lock file name
LOCKFILE=/var/lock/myprogram.lock

# Set noclobber option to ensure lock file is not REPLACED.
set -o noclobber

# Open lock file for R+W on a new file descriptor
# and assign the new file descriptor to "lockfd" variable.
# This does NOT obtain a lock but ensures the file exists and opens it.
exec {lockfd}<> "${LOCKFILE}" || {
  echo "pid=$$ failed to open LOCKFILE='${LOCKFILE}'" 1>&2
  exit 1
}

# TODO!!!! undo/set the desired noclobber value for the remainder of the script
set +o noclobber

# Lock on the allocated file descriptor or fail
# Adjust flock options e.g. --noblock as needed
flock --exclusive --nonblock ${lockfd} || {
  echo "pid=$$ failed to obtain lock fd='${lockfd}' LOCKFILE='${LOCKFILE}'" 1>&2
  exit 1
}

# DO work here
echo "pid=$$ obtained exclusive lock fd='${lockfd}' LOCKFILE='${LOCKFILE}'"

# Can unlock after critical section and do more work after unlocking
#flock -u ${lockfd};
# if unlocking then might as well close lockfd too
#exec {lockfd}<&-

一些unix具有与前面提到的flock非常相似的lockfile。

从手册中:

Lockfile可以用来创建一个 或者更多的信号量文件。如果锁, 文件不能创建所有指定的 文件(在指定的顺序)，它 等待睡眠时间(默认为8) 秒并重试最后一个文件 没有成功。您可以指定 直到重试的次数 返回失败。如果数字 重试次数为-1(默认值，即 -r-1)锁文件将永远重试。

一个有flock(1)但没有subshell的例子。Flock ()ed文件/tmp/foo永远不会被删除，但这没关系，因为它会被Flock()和un-flock()ed。

#!/bin/bash

exec 9<> /tmp/foo
flock -n 9
RET=$?
if [[ $RET -ne 0 ]] ; then
    echo "lock failed, exiting"
    exit
fi

#Now we are inside the "critical section"
echo "inside lock"
sleep 5
exec 9>&- #close fd 9, and release lock

#The part below is outside the critical section (the lock)
echo "lock released"
sleep 5