4 ms·

Hell has indeed frozen over, and that's good news! From the screenshots, that actually looks like a proper terminal too. I wonder what will happen to Powershel

Hell has indeed frozen over, and that's good news! From the screenshots, that actually looks like a proper terminal too. I wonder what will happen to Powershell now.

brazzledazzle 11y ago
Powershell will probably be fine. Besides them both being a REPL and scripting language they're very different. I guess the simplest way to put it is in powershell you're passing around objects and in bash you're passing around strings. That's an oversimplification though. I'd start wondering about powershell's future when bash starts getting the ability to tap into .Net the way powershell does.
- TallGuyShort 11y ago
  As exemplified by this announcement, Bash in isolation is not that valuable. It's the standard UNIX tools that most Bash scripts just assume are there that really round it out as a platform. Supporting the piping of objects instead of text? Not such a big deal. Replacing UNIX tools with object versions? I agree - very valuable, but now a massive undertaking involving redefining a lot of flags, etc.
- TillE 11y ago
  Right, PowerShell is probably irreplaceable as a sysadmin tool. But for other tasks lumped into the "scripting" category, I'd much rather use bash.
james-skemp 11y ago
Was hoping the comments here would be talking about PowerShell. I try to use it whenever I can, but if bash performs the same, the community may leverage it more for shared scripts/etcetera.
optimiz3 11y ago
Let's hope death by obsolescence. Being forced to learn a proprietary not-invented-here scripting language with little value-add over Bash is an anathema to any developer.
- vvanders 11y ago
  There's quite a few things that you can do with powershell on a windows os that you can't do with bash since the APIs aren't there.
  - optimiz3 11y ago
    It's not a conceptual stretch to have Bash adapters for .Net objects, PowerShell is unnecessary.
beezle 11y ago
Clearly, the end times are upon us
vdnkh 11y ago
>I wonder what will happen to Powershell now For Windows shops (like my current job), it will most definitely be sticking around
- TheOsiris 11y ago
  has PS been adopted that widely? the syntax always struck me as weird
  - vdnkh 11y ago
    For automated building/deploying .NET projects on Windows you have very little choice. Powershell has its own libraries to invoke MSBuild and it's integration with .NET saves a ton of effort on more complex tasks (like parallelization, background jobs, and service management). Is it irreplaceable? Maybe not, but it's clearly the most powerful tool for the job.
  - PatentTroll 11y ago
    PS is actually pretty awesome
rpgmaker 11y ago
Security will still be Windows "security" though. I know my way and I haven't had a Windows PC infected in years but while using it I certainly don't have the relative peace of mind that I have while on Linux.
badloginagain 11y ago
Linux API integration as native Powershell commands, push Powershell as 'unified Bash' for Windows/Linux, try to gain marketshare.
joeyaiello 11y ago
PM on the PowerShell team here. First, just let me say, I'm a huge fan of Linux and can't be more excited about Bash coming to Windows. As others have mentioned throughout this thread, PowerShell isn't going anywhere. We're investing considerably in the PowerShell ecosystem. PowerShell/WMF 5.0 just came out with a ton of new features[1], and we're not slowing down any time soon. Because it's operating mostly in user mode today, Bash on Windows is much more suited to developer scenarios. I've already played with workflows where I'm running vim inside of Bash on Windows to edit PowerShell scripts that I'm executing in a separate PowerShell prompt. In fact, I can plug along fine in a PowerShell window, run a quick 'bash -c 'vim /mnt/c/foo.ps1'', make a few edits, and be right back inside my existing PS prompt. This really is just another (really freaking awesome) tool in your toolbox. [1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/wmf/releaseNotes http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/wmf/releaseNotes
- JdeBP 11y ago
  > Bash coming to Windows This is part of the long-standing problem for people: this loopy re-presentation of what happens that completely ignores the past and even the present. A lot of us have been using bash and other shells, and indeed vim and other things, on Windows for years. They aren't "coming to Windows". They've already been there for a long time. We've been able to invoke "vim foo.ps1" to edit our files, and do so without any necessity for an intermediary (and entirely supernumerary) "bash -c" too. I did so myself, only yesterday. This is not the news. A new "Linux" subsystem is coming to Windows NT that allows one to spawn and to run unaltered Linux binaries directly. Explaining this as "bash is coming to Windows" is to give a hugely dumbed-down explanation, one that is so markedly wrong that it (mis-)leads to the very same mistaken assumptions about the imminent death of PowerShell and so forth that you are now having to counter in several places. (I know. It's not your own explanation. Nonetheless, one should not adopt the error from someone else, especially if one then has to firefight the world leaping to the wrong conclusions based upon it. That's just making a rod for one's own back.)

Hell has indeed frozen over, and that's good news! From the screenshots, that actually looks like a proper terminal too. I wonder what will happen to Powershell now.

brazzledazzle 11y ago

Powershell will probably be fine. Besides them both being a REPL and scripting language they're very different. I guess the simplest way to put it is in powershell you're passing around objects and in bash you're passing around strings. That's an oversimplification though. I'd start wondering about powershell's future when bash starts getting the ability to tap into .Net the way powershell does.

TallGuyShort 11y ago
As exemplified by this announcement, Bash in isolation is not that valuable. It's the standard UNIX tools that most Bash scripts just assume are there that really round it out as a platform. Supporting the piping of objects instead of text? Not such a big deal. Replacing UNIX tools with object versions? I agree - very valuable, but now a massive undertaking involving redefining a lot of flags, etc.
TillE 11y ago
Right, PowerShell is probably irreplaceable as a sysadmin tool. But for other tasks lumped into the "scripting" category, I'd much rather use bash.

james-skemp 11y ago

Was hoping the comments here would be talking about PowerShell. I try to use it whenever I can, but if bash performs the same, the community may leverage it more for shared scripts/etcetera.

optimiz3 11y ago

Let's hope death by obsolescence. Being forced to learn a proprietary not-invented-here scripting language with little value-add over Bash is an anathema to any developer.

vvanders 11y ago
There's quite a few things that you can do with powershell on a windows os that you can't do with bash since the APIs aren't there.
- optimiz3 11y ago
  It's not a conceptual stretch to have Bash adapters for .Net objects, PowerShell is unnecessary.

beezle 11y ago

Clearly, the end times are upon us

vdnkh 11y ago

>I wonder what will happen to Powershell now For Windows shops (like my current job), it will most definitely be sticking around

TheOsiris 11y ago
has PS been adopted that widely? the syntax always struck me as weird
- vdnkh 11y ago
  For automated building/deploying .NET projects on Windows you have very little choice. Powershell has its own libraries to invoke MSBuild and it's integration with .NET saves a ton of effort on more complex tasks (like parallelization, background jobs, and service management). Is it irreplaceable? Maybe not, but it's clearly the most powerful tool for the job.
- PatentTroll 11y ago
  PS is actually pretty awesome

rpgmaker 11y ago

Security will still be Windows "security" though. I know my way and I haven't had a Windows PC infected in years but while using it I certainly don't have the relative peace of mind that I have while on Linux.

badloginagain 11y ago

Linux API integration as native Powershell commands, push Powershell as 'unified Bash' for Windows/Linux, try to gain marketshare.

joeyaiello 11y ago

PM on the PowerShell team here. First, just let me say, I'm a huge fan of Linux and can't be more excited about Bash coming to Windows. As others have mentioned throughout this thread, PowerShell isn't going anywhere. We're investing considerably in the PowerShell ecosystem. PowerShell/WMF 5.0 just came out with a ton of new features[1], and we're not slowing down any time soon. Because it's operating mostly in user mode today, Bash on Windows is much more suited to developer scenarios. I've already played with workflows where I'm running vim inside of Bash on Windows to edit PowerShell scripts that I'm executing in a separate PowerShell prompt. In fact, I can plug along fine in a PowerShell window, run a quick 'bash -c 'vim /mnt/c/foo.ps1'', make a few edits, and be right back inside my existing PS prompt. This really is just another (really freaking awesome) tool in your toolbox. [1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/wmf/releaseNotes http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/wmf/releaseNotes

JdeBP 11y ago
> Bash coming to Windows This is part of the long-standing problem for people: this loopy re-presentation of what happens that completely ignores the past and even the present. A lot of us have been using bash and other shells, and indeed vim and other things, on Windows for years. They aren't "coming to Windows". They've already been there for a long time. We've been able to invoke "vim foo.ps1" to edit our files, and do so without any necessity for an intermediary (and entirely supernumerary) "bash -c" too. I did so myself, only yesterday. This is not the news. A new "Linux" subsystem is coming to Windows NT that allows one to spawn and to run unaltered Linux binaries directly. Explaining this as "bash is coming to Windows" is to give a hugely dumbed-down explanation, one that is so markedly wrong that it (mis-)leads to the very same mistaken assumptions about the imminent death of PowerShell and so forth that you are now having to counter in several places. (I know. It's not your own explanation. Nonetheless, one should not adopt the error from someone else, especially if one then has to firefight the world leaping to the wrong conclusions based upon it. That's just making a rod for one's own back.)