Question: Quite often, the script I want to execute is not located in my current working directory and I don't really want to leave it.

Is it a good practice to run scripts (BASH, Perl etc.) from another directory? Will they usually find all the stuff they need to run properly?

If so, what is the best way to run a "distant" script? Is it

```
. /path/to/script

```

or

```
sh /path/to/script

```

and how to use `sudo` in such cases? This, for example, doesn't work:

```
sudo . /path/to/script

```

Answer: 
sh /path/to/script will spawn a new shell and run she script independent of your current shell. The `source` (.) command will call all the commands in the script in the current shell. If the script happens to call `exit` for example, then you'll lose the current shell. Because of this it is usually safer to call scripts in a separate shell with sh or to execute them as binaries using either the full (starting with `/`) or relative path (`./`). If called as binaries, they will be executed with the specified interpreter (`#!/bin/bash`, for example).

As for knowing whether or not a script will find the files it needs, there is no good answer, other than looking at the script to see what it does. As an option, you could always go to the script's folder in a sub-process without leaving your current folder:

```
(cd /wherever/ ; sh script.sh)

```
I'm not sure it works like this in linux, assuming it doesn't if no-ones suggested it. But instead of using ././ to go back directories. Can you use quotes to give it an absolute path? Maybe it doesn't give you access to the whole drive to even be able to do that actually come to think of it.