Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.196.233.208

Forum Moderators: bakedjake

Message Too Old, No Replies

shells, which one do you use?

     
10:40 pm on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member littleman is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:June 17, 2000
posts:2924
votes: 0


I use bash, mostly because it seems to save me a lot of key strokes, and it is what I was first introduced to.
10:56 pm on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:July 22, 2002
posts:1782
votes: 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 ;).

Andreas

11:10 pm on Mar 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 14, 2002
posts:1192
votes: 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)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 26, 2000
posts:414
votes: 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)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 11, 2003
posts:442
votes: 0


Also use bash. What I started and stuck with.
12:23 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member eliteweb is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:June 5, 2001
posts:2723
votes: 0


bash and csh :P
12:27 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:May 21, 2002
posts:762
votes: 0


bash and csh... both for the past 9 years.
12:39 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 6, 2002
posts:191
votes: 0


First box was C shell on Solaris,
rest BASH on Red Hat.

GeorgeGG

1:10 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 18, 2002
posts:126
votes: 0


Always been bash
1:42 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 28, 2002
posts:492
votes: 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.

René.

1:59 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 12, 2002
posts:885
votes: 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)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:July 22, 2002
posts:1782
votes: 0


>>Look in /etc/passwd on your system.

Where do I find /etc/passwd?

Where do I find my system?

Just kidding.

Actually I once changed my shell to /bin/false. Now that was fun.

Andreas

10:19 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 7, 2003
posts:7
votes: 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)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 28, 2002
posts:492
votes: 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.

René.

10:48 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member digitalghost is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 23, 2002
posts:3687
votes: 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.

From: [daemonnews.org...]

11:26 am on Mar 7, 2003 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 28, 2002
posts:492
votes: 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.

René

5:13 pm on Mar 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 3, 2002
posts:482
votes: 0


Bash and only bash. The first thing I compiled under NetBSD was bash, sorry can't stand csh.