5 ms·

I think a big issue is that bash is available everywhere, while fish might not be. There's also the fact that a lot of us have fancy dotfiles for our work/home

I think a big issue is that bash is available everywhere, while fish might not be. There's also the fact that a lot of us have fancy dotfiles for our work/home computers, and switching to another shell would mean having to rewrite them in the target shell language.

yani 8y ago
Availability is a big issue. It is nearly impossible to get a seasoned sysadmin to install fish for you when bash is available.
- h1d 8y ago
  If you're convinced your productivity may change by ditching bash, I'm not sure what kind of counterargument the sysadmin will bring.
  - petee 8y ago
    Avoiding the next Shellshock? As bad as it was, who knows what goodies an even less-audited shell has in store
    - h1d 8y ago
      Using bash never prevented the problem in the first place.
      - petee 8y ago
        Bash was the problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellshock_(software_bug) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellshock_(software_bug)
h1d 8y ago
So, you'd rather use something that is decades old because you can't/don't want to (ask to) install 1 new program on the server and take a weekend to rebuild your config file? You can simply import aliases as is and in some cases, you may be able to even simplify parts of your config. Personally, it was easy for me as I'm administering the servers and it was all just installing fish on every servers. (some dozens.)
- squeaky-clean 8y ago
  It's not just me, but convincing my team to switch to a new scripting language. Especially if they've never heard of fish and have been using bash/sh their whole careers.
- znpy 8y ago
  > So, you'd rather use something that is decades old because you can't/don't want to (ask to) install 1 new program on the server and take a weekend to rebuild your config file? Absolutely, yes. Because long story short, bash is TriedAndTrue® technology. Stuff that works. It takes a bit of dedication to be mastered at a decent level but it pays off immensely. It's so ubiquitous it is one of those tools that you can learn once, use for the rest of your life, and use in a lot of contexts. It's so widespread that it can bring you very far with very little. All this being said, as someone who used to write code for a living (and now works as a System Engineer, using the bash shell everyday) I must say that if you do not do input verification (according to the language of your choice) and something goes wrong then it's your fault.
  - opinionator1 8y ago
    "works" More like "better the devil you know" (if you can even say that much). Bash doesn't scale. Every shop larger than 1 has been burned by bash gotchas. Use a real scripting language and shell out to the commands and builtins when necessary. At my shop bash is strictly disallowed in production environments and we're all better off for it.
    - robot01 8y ago
      Do you guys have a different, approved shell for prod?
      - opinionator1 8y ago
        Nobody should be using any shell in prod
    - 8y ago

yani 8y ago

Availability is a big issue. It is nearly impossible to get a seasoned sysadmin to install fish for you when bash is available.

h1d 8y ago
If you're convinced your productivity may change by ditching bash, I'm not sure what kind of counterargument the sysadmin will bring.
- petee 8y ago
  Avoiding the next Shellshock? As bad as it was, who knows what goodies an even less-audited shell has in store
  - h1d 8y ago
    Using bash never prevented the problem in the first place.
    - petee 8y ago
      Bash was the problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellshock_(software_bug) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shellshock_(software_bug)

h1d 8y ago

So, you'd rather use something that is decades old because you can't/don't want to (ask to) install 1 new program on the server and take a weekend to rebuild your config file? You can simply import aliases as is and in some cases, you may be able to even simplify parts of your config. Personally, it was easy for me as I'm administering the servers and it was all just installing fish on every servers. (some dozens.)

squeaky-clean 8y ago
It's not just me, but convincing my team to switch to a new scripting language. Especially if they've never heard of fish and have been using bash/sh their whole careers.
znpy 8y ago
> So, you'd rather use something that is decades old because you can't/don't want to (ask to) install 1 new program on the server and take a weekend to rebuild your config file? Absolutely, yes. Because long story short, bash is TriedAndTrue® technology. Stuff that works. It takes a bit of dedication to be mastered at a decent level but it pays off immensely. It's so ubiquitous it is one of those tools that you can learn once, use for the rest of your life, and use in a lot of contexts. It's so widespread that it can bring you very far with very little. All this being said, as someone who used to write code for a living (and now works as a System Engineer, using the bash shell everyday) I must say that if you do not do input verification (according to the language of your choice) and something goes wrong then it's your fault.
- opinionator1 8y ago
  "works" More like "better the devil you know" (if you can even say that much). Bash doesn't scale. Every shop larger than 1 has been burned by bash gotchas. Use a real scripting language and shell out to the commands and builtins when necessary. At my shop bash is strictly disallowed in production environments and we're all better off for it.
  - robot01 8y ago
    Do you guys have a different, approved shell for prod?
    - opinionator1 8y ago
      Nobody should be using any shell in prod
  - 8y ago