| 10:56 pm on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I do all my system calls directly without the help of a shell ;). Seriously I use bash as well on both Windows and GNU [gnu.org]/Linux [kernel.org]. The reason: The same why I still use Internet Explorer and Outlook Express. It´s the standard installation and I know too little about computers to be able to change it ;).
| 11:10 pm on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
> I do all my system calls directly without the help of a shell :)
Andreas: Do you use cat as your editor :) I seem to recall that a UNIX wizard is someone who writes device drivers using cat.
On my Win2K system I use tcsh, the end stage for me of a migration from sh -> csh -> tcsh. Never looked at ksh or bash, so I have no idea what (if anything) I am missing.
| 11:58 pm on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I use bash, its the default for redhat and never thought about using another one.
| 12:22 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Also use bash. What I started and stuck with.
| 12:23 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
bash and csh :P
| 12:27 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
bash and csh... both for the past 9 years.
| 12:39 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
First box was C shell on Solaris,
rest BASH on Red Hat.
| 1:10 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Always been bash
| 1:42 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I use bash as everybody else here.
Different unixes have had different defaults. Old AT&T systems use sh, later BSD use csh (and tcsh), SystemV use ksh and later Linux use bash.
Most people tend to use the default shell, maybe because most don't use the many advanced features.
Personally I have used sh, csh, tcsh, ksh and bash. Tcsh was my shell of choice when I worked with BSD, but bash is a very good shell with just about every feature that has ever been in a shell, and I now use that exclusively.
| 1:59 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Bash. I've yet to find or hear of something that one of the alternatives did, Bash didn't, and I wanted, so the defautl wins.
|It´s the standard installation and I know too little about computers to be able to change it. |
Look in /etc/passwd on your system. I'm sure you'll have no trouble at all figuring it out. ;) For those who are less inclined to muck with system files themselves, there's a command called 'chsh' to CHange your SHell.
| 10:00 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>>Look in /etc/passwd on your system.
Where do I find /etc/passwd?
Where do I find my system?
Actually I once changed my shell to /bin/false. Now that was fun.
| 10:19 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
use bash for basic moving around and doing stuff.. but for your shell scripts, i suggest tcsh.. it's simply more powerful. :)
| 10:43 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|but for your shell scripts, i suggest tcsh.. it's simply more powerful. |
Why? What does tcsh add that bash hasn't? What does tcsh add for scripting that you couldn't do in csh?
It has been a long time since I used tcsh, so it might be ignorance on my behalf, but I'd like to know our of curiosity.
| 10:48 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|The most obvious advance of tcsh with respect to csh is surely the possibility of editing the commands in the buffer with the help of the usual emacs or vi key commands; both are very widespread editing programs in the world of BSD and Unix. |
| 11:26 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)|
junbin's claim was on scripting, not command line editing. Both bash and tcsh are very good at this. I believe tcsh was the first shell to incorporate a good command line editor in a shell, many many years ago.
| 5:13 pm on Mar 8, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Bash and only bash. The first thing I compiled under NetBSD was bash, sorry can't stand csh.