Sometimes, especially when working with scripts (let's say Python, Bash, or even PowerShell), you realize the output scrolling past in your terminal is just too much. Maybe you want to save it for reference, need to process it further, or simply wish to avoid cluttering your console. Redirecting output is the unsung hero technique that makes this possible. I’ve stumbled into this issue many times—sometimes forgetting to redirect and losing precious logs, other times redirecting to the wrong file and wondering why nothing appeared. This article lays out the practical methods, stumbles, and nitty-gritty details of redirecting print output in scripts, peppered with real-world stories and a look at how standards can differ internationally.
Imagine you’re running a script that processes hundreds of files, printing progress and errors along the way. Watching that zip by in the console is less than helpful. You want to capture everything—for debugging, compliance, or just plain peace of mind. Output redirection lets you take whatever your script prints and send it elsewhere: a text file, a log, even a printer or another program.
In regulated industries, like cross-border trade or finance, output logs are sometimes required for audits or compliance. For example, the OECD’s Common Reporting Standard mandates detailed transaction logs for data exchange. If your scripts don’t capture output, you could miss crucial evidence in case of a dispute.
Let’s start with the simplest, most widely used method: the redirection operators in Unix-like shells (> for overwrite, >> for append).
$ python myscript.py > output.txt
This sends everything printed by myscript.py to output.txt. If you want to add to an existing file instead of replacing it, use >>:
$ python myscript.py >> output.txtI once made the rookie mistake of forgetting the double arrow and wiped out a week’s worth of logs. Now, I double-check every time.
Some scripts print errors to stderr. To capture both normal and error output, use:
$ python myscript.py > all_output.txt 2>&1This trick took me a while to nail down—missing error messages can make debugging a nightmare.
Let’s say you want to redirect output from within Python itself. Here’s a quick example:
import sys
sys.stdout = open('output.txt', 'w')
print("This goes into the file, not the console!")But beware: if you do this, all subsequent prints go into the file. Once I left this on in a long-running script and wondered why nothing showed in my terminal for hours.
If you want more control, Python’s logging module lets you direct output to files, consoles, or even remote servers—with log levels and formats.
import logging
logging.basicConfig(filename='myapp.log', level=logging.INFO)
logging.info('This is logged to a file.')This is my go-to for anything more serious than a throwaway script. It’s especially useful when you need to comply with standards like ISO/IEC 27001 which require audit-ready logging.
In Unix, you can chain programs together:
$ python myscript.py | grep ERROR > errors.txtI use this to zero in on specific messages without wading through megabytes of logs.
Let’s say Company A in Germany exports goods to Company B in the US. Their customs documentation scripts generate logs that must be archived for inspection. The EU’s Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 and the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have different standards for log retention and verification.
During an audit, German authorities accept logs in plain text, but US CBP insists on cryptographically signed logs with timestamps. If the script output was not redirected and stored properly, Company B could face compliance penalties.
As Dr. Linda Xu, a trade compliance analyst I interviewed last year, put it: “In cross-border trade, verifiable logs are as essential as the goods themselves. Regulators want to see not just what happened, but that you can prove it, unaltered. That’s why how you capture your script output—where, how, and with what metadata—matters.”
| Country/Region | Standard Name | Legal Basis | Enforcement Body | Output/Log Format |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| European Union | EORI Verified Export Logs | Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 | European Commission (TAXUD) | Plain text or XML, digital signature optional |
| United States | ACE Automated Export System | 19 CFR Part 192 | CBP (Customs and Border Protection) | Digitally signed XML/JSON with timestamps |
| China | Single Window Log | General Administration of Customs Order No. 236 | GACC | Encrypted XML, log archival required |
A few months ago, I was automating a compliance report generator for a logistics client. I set up the script and did a test run, redirecting output to a file. All seemed well until the client called, saying the logs were empty. Turns out, the script was using print() for some messages and logging for others, but I’d only redirected one. After a bit of head-scratching and some coffee, I changed the script to funnel everything through the logging module and pointed it to a file. Problem solved. The lesson? Consistency is key, and always check which streams your script uses.
Redirecting script output isn’t just a convenience—it’s a necessity for anyone needing repeatable results, debugging, or regulatory compliance. From simple shell redirects to advanced logging modules, the method depends on your needs. And as international standards show, what’s good enough in one country may not cut it elsewhere. My advice: know your tools, know your requirements, and always double-check what’s actually being captured. For the next step, try redirecting your own script’s output, then open the file to see if it’s what you expect. If you’re working in a regulated industry, read up on your country’s specific standards, such as those from the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement.
Final thought: output redirection may seem trivial, but as real cases (and plenty of hours lost to missing logs) show, it’s a detail you can’t afford to ignore.