3 ms·
Clicking around, I am glad to see portability to non-bash shells covered in some topics, despite the name of the site. It seems to me like sometime in the last
by asveikau 7y ago
Clicking around, I am glad to see portability to non-bash shells covered in some topics, despite the name of the site.
It seems to me like sometime in the last 10-15 years, what we used to call "shell scripting" became "bash" in popular discourse. I myself learned to write shell scripts in times and places where bash was the most popular default, but I never thought of it as writing intentional bashisms, but a set of skills applicable to multiple possible implementations, so I find that shift in jargon a little disappointing or incorrect.
- tannhaeuser 7y agoAn even more important point since the two mainstream desktop Unixen (Mac OS and Ubuntu) ship with zsh and dash, resp., by default.
- laumars 7y agodash is shipped as a replacement for the Bourne shell, not bash. Thus Ubuntu does also ship bash too. Alpine doesn't have bash installed. It alsonpretty common not to have bash as part of the base image on non-Linux systems too. You've already mentioned macOS but the same is true for many of the BSDs.
- wodenokoto 7y agoI think bash has become the new name for "shell", in the same way kleenex and hoover became names for product categories, rather than brands.
- kyuudou 7y agoI think the biggest distinction between shells is whether they are C-shell derivative (csh/tcsh) or Bourne shell derivative (sh/ksh/bash).