7 ms·

My shell setup with Fish and Tmux (2021)

167 points by behnamoh 4y ago

throwaway290 4y ago
The main inconvenience of fish is not even having to go into another shell for some tasks like virtual env activation, but wondering whether some command you just ran silently did something wrong because of shell incompatibility. (Edited) Also, I wonder how fast is OMF compared to Starship?
- buildbot 4y ago
  Virtualenv supports fish just fine. . venv/bin/activate.fish
  - throwaway290 4y ago
    Interesting, I didn't know they have a separate activate script now
- rgoulter 4y ago
  > The main inconvenience of fish is not even having to go into another shell for some tasks like virtual env activation For stuff like "in this directory, I want this virtual env activated", I'd recommend using direnv. https://direnv.net/ https://direnv.net/ > wondering whether some command you just ran silently did something wrong because of shell incompatibility I don't recall running into silent incompatibities. Do you have examples in mind? Although, yeah, you can't just copy-paste most sh/bash snippets into fish.
  - throwaway290 4y ago
    I'm sure there are some ways it can fail silently, but excluding that I think of a function that fails loudly but higher-level function does not check that.
- w23b07d28 4y ago
  > The main inconvenience of fish is not even having to go into another shell for some tasks like virtual env activation, but wondering whether some command you just ran silently did something wrong because of shell incompatibility. I have the impression that you just overlook all the rest of the things that can go wrong when using Bash, because you are simply used to it, you know it and you know how it will behave. In the sense that with Dash you would perhaps have a similar problem. Fish is really pleasant and forgives a lot. > Also, I wonder how fast is OMF compared to Starship? Those are two total different projects. During my hypomania on Fish (yup), I didn't even use OMF, but added things manually and only those really needed, so that there was as little code to maintain as possible. Fish does not have a huge number of scripts, plug-ins. If Starship is too slow for you, you might like Tide. I found nothing more interesting, after which I returned to Starship anyway, but it's really fast. https://github.com/IlanCosman/tide https://github.com/IlanCosman/tide Perhaps you don't need something faster than Starship, just to configure Fish in such a way that it cleans itself of garbage and runs asynchronously?
  - throwaway290 4y ago
    > I have the impression that you just overlook all the rest of the things that can go wrong when using Bash, because you are simply used to it, you know it and you know how it will behave I don't write much of bash or fish, I mean scripts written by others. Encounter cryptic error messages then realize script is just assuming shell is POSIX > Starship is too slow Starship plenty fast for me. You say it's completely different than OMF but from what I see they both exist to customize your prompt, no?
    - w23b07d28 4y ago
      > I don't write much of bash or fish, I mean scripts written by others. Encounter cryptic error messages then realize script is just assuming shell is POSIX I run most of my scripts in Bash, but what I can, I convert to Fish. If the advantages of Fish are less important than POSIX compliance, I won't suggest anything, because I have no need to be POSIX compliant, so maybe I don't really have the same concerns. :) > Starship plenty fast for me. You say it's completely different than OMF but from what I see they both exist to customize your prompt, no? Forgive me, I mistakenly assumed you meant that Starship runs too slowly. It depends on how you define prompt. Strictly it will be whatever is shown in the terminal when it waits for user input. OMF is a multi-tool that, in addition to modifying the appearance, acts as something like a plugin manager. Starship gives you "just the look". I think a good analogy would be to compare systemd and runit in 1 category.
asdfman123 4y ago
I’ve got a random question for the terminal folk: I’m often testing a web server hosted on a remote server that hot reloads, but I have to wait for it to finish compiling. I can tell it’s done if I have a tab open looking at the logs, but ideally I’d like some kind of icon that’s yellow when compiling, green when compiled, etc. What could I use for that?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- hboon 4y ago
  If you mean to mix in GUI, on macOS, there is BitBar and another one (forgot the name) that just puts a big coloured dot in the menubar that you can curl to change its color. Something along that line would work.
  - asdfman123 4y ago
    What about Linux?
- akira2501 4y ago
  tmux. If a bell, or ctrl-g, is output on the terminal, the tmux status line will indicate this fact if you are viewing a different terminal. It will stay indicating until you switch back to that terminal. tmux will also show you the name of the command that's currently running, so if it's a make file or other script that finishes, you can observe that on it's own, but if you add an `echo -e "\007"` to the end of your script, you'll get the indicator.
  - asdfman123 4y ago
    Nice! I already use tmux. I’m not sure if the log file outputs anything like that though. There’s a way to hook into the build process and run commands after it completes. I’m guessing I might have to do that to get the status line wired in.
    - 4y ago
oplav 4y ago
> Capable terminal emulator (macOS’ Terminal.app doesn’t qualify) Why doesn't Terminal.app qualify? I used to use iTerm 2 because I liked its pane management, but after switching to using tmux several years ago, I've solely used Terminal.app + tmux without any issues in my workflow. What am I missing out on?
- nntwozz 4y ago
  I'm sure everyone has a favorite, mine is simply able to slide out iTerm2 from the top of the screen with a hotkey (tilde ofc.) à la Quake console. https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/48796/iterm-as-a-slide-out-terminal-from-the-top-of-the-screen https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/48796/iterm-as-a-s...
  - Cthulhu_ 4y ago
    Same, lol; that really is the only unique selling point for me at the moment. Although I'm sure there's a lot of subtle things (performance, font rendering, tabs, etc) that do it for me as well.
    - microtonal 4y ago
      performance The latency of iTerm has traditionally been much worse than Terminal.app. It got a bit better with GPU rendering, but it still trails behind Terminal.app quite a bit. https://danluu.com/term-latency/ https://danluu.com/term-latency/ https://www.lkhrs.com/blog/2022/07/terminal-latency/ https://www.lkhrs.com/blog/2022/07/terminal-latency/ I tried iTerm for a while because Terminal.app does not support true color. But the difference in latency is definitely noticeable to me.
  - jdalt 4y ago
    I use Alacritty as my terminal emulator plus hammerspoon to get the same effect.
    - tjfl 4y ago
      Would you be willing to share your Hammerspoon config, or at least that part? Would love to do this with Alacritty!
creamyhorror 4y ago
I installed Fish last night, first non-default shell I've used ever, because I saw Scott Hanselman's very pretty prompt and realised I'd been missing out. Those custom Bash prompts back in the day were positively primitive compared to what people have been doing with custom fonts and Unicode emoji symbols. Researched a bunch of themes/prompts, initially wanted oh-my-posh (which Hanselman uses), then Starship.rs because it was fast, then powerlevel10k because it was faster, then saw opinions in favour of Fish over Zsh, sidetripped to r/UnixPorn along the way, and finally settled on Fish + Fisher (plugin manager) + Tide (a Fish port of powerlevel10k) + Catppuccin Fish (a pastel theme). The configuration wizard in Tide makes it very simple to pick the prompt's design and colours, and further customisation is easy too. Quite a rabbithole, but I'm pretty satisfied now!
- rndmize 4y ago
  Also on the Fish + Fisher + Tide train. I've been using fish for some years now, always been a fan of the autocomplete and highlighting, but Tide feels like a step up. Really like the way it shows my node version on the right is a relevant project.
  - artdigital 4y ago
    Also a fish user here, but didn't find a need for Fisher yet. What packages did you install? I used it to install z but every upgrade with fisher just messed things up, so I killed it from my setup and settled on zoxide which has proper fish bindings Now I just use fish + starship and don't mess around with packages
    - gravlaks 4y ago
      Here's mine: fisher install PatrickF1/fzf.fish fisher install urbainvaes/fzf-marks # These two to get sdkman and nvm to work in fish, IIRC fisher install reitzig/sdkman-for-fish@v1.4.0 fisher install jorgebucaran/nvm.fish
    - 7839284023 4y ago
      I like https://github.com/meaningful-ooo/sponge https://github.com/meaningful-ooo/sponge > Sponge quietly runs in the background and keeps your shell history clean from typos, incorrectly used commands and everything you don't want to store due to privacy reasons. ___ Also here is a nice list you can take a lookt at: https://github.com/jorgebucaran/awsm.fish https://github.com/jorgebucaran/awsm.fish
lordgrenville 4y ago
I tried Fish for a while, and found the three things I liked most about it were all available as addons for zsh, so I went back to zsh with just these three lines appended to .zshrc: source /usr/share/zsh-syntax-highlighting/zsh-syntax-highlighting.zsh source /usr/share/zsh-autosuggestions/zsh-autosuggestions.zsh source /usr/share/zsh-abbr/zsh-abbr.zsh (In case it's not clear, install them with your system package manager.)
- em-bee 4y ago
  i love it when innovations in a new application are carried over to older tools. zsh seems especially suitable for that. it soaks up good ideas like a sponge and finds a way to integrate them. on the other hand it does make zsh feel kind of overwhelming at times in terms of options available. my favorite part besides autosuggestions is the way history works, not incremental but i can type out a search term, and then start searching up and down the history. incremental search is always irritating me by showing me irrelevant stuff while i am still typing, which i find distracting because i have to process it while at the same time focusing on typing the search term right. now if only i could also have multiple search terms... (i also prefer the fish syntax, but that is more of a matter of taste and getting used to)
  - nickjj 4y ago
    > (i also prefer the fish syntax, but that is more of a matter of taste and getting used to) IMO one of the biggest advantages of zsh is it's almost 100% compatible with Bash. If I'm in my shell and want to run an adhoc command with a for loop I want to do it with Bash's syntax, not learn a new Fish syntax. Having to manually drop into `bash` to run a bunch of commands is too inconvenient. Also you'll find most examples online using POSIX shell or Bash compatible syntax. You can carry over those to your dedicated scripts and adhoc commands. Your knowledge becomes shared.
    - EdwardDiego 4y ago
      A Fish for loop is near identical to a Bash for loop, it simply omits the "do".
blacklight 4y ago
I've been giving fish a try on a periodic basis every 6 months or so. The pattern is always the same: I read an amazing article on how fish makes X easier/fancier than bash/zsh, I install it again, I spend half a day trying to export my two decades of bash/zsh customizations, and eventually I just give up overwhelmed by the amount of required work. Fish is a great shell, but I don't know why they decided to go all the way and completely break the compatibility with anything that POSIX has produced over the past four decades. I won't rewrite all of my shell functions, aliases, for loops, string concatenations and environment variables to comply with a shell that is only compliant with itself, sorry. And I don't know why they decided to go the nuclear way and break compatibility so hard where they could have at least guaranteed a back-compatibility layer with (at least) zsh. Reinventing the whole wheel to make it look exactly the way you want, while disregarding compatibility with everything that already exists, is probably the biggest violation of the UNIX philosophy.
- em-bee 4y ago
  then fish is maybe not for you for now. i like fish exactly because it broke out of the limitations imposed by POSIX. in my view, POSIX should have never even gone as far as specifying any kind of shell syntax. imagine what we'd do if it had gone even as far as specifying programming languages. that stuff just doesn't belong there. compatibility should be limited to interoperability. but it should not limit how we can design our tools. and the tools do adapt. more and more of them work just fine with fish. maybe some day in the future your tools will work with fish too. I spend half a day trying to export my two decades of bash/zsh customizations don't. if you switch to fish, you should not want/need those customizations, because if you want to make fish look or work like your old shell, why are you even switching? you are learning a new environment with new features. get used to fish as it is first. after a while you may discover fish's own customization options, and the many tools that provide customizations across multiple shells. your own handcoded adaptions are probably not even portable to any other shell. Reinventing the whole wheel to make it look exactly the way you want, while disregarding compatibility with everything that already exists, is probably the biggest violation of the UNIX philosophy fish is not reinventing the wheel. it is creating new wheels with features that we never had before. the popularity of fish just shows that this incompatibility is not a problem to many. if it were, fish would be dead by now. other shells are gaining ground that also break compatibility and maybe we'll find a future where these compatibility issues are not issues anymore because we will have learned to build environments that don't depend on that compatibility.
outluch 4y ago
My trivial setup with tmux + oh-my-zsh + mosh(if firewall allows). Enjoying it in every machine I touch. https://gitlab.com/outluch/osetup https://gitlab.com/outluch/osetup
Bishnu00 4y ago
I used fish extensively a few months ago, had to switch back to bash for some reasons, but yeah fish is incredible.
cassepipe 4y ago
Instead of tmux, I personnally use Wez's Terminal (Wezterm: https://wezfurlong.org/wezterm/ https://wezfurlong.org/wezterm/) because it is both a capable terminal and a capable multiplexer and I like to have one less layer to care about. One thing I personally like very much is that it supports a command line tab and pane navigation/management : https://github.com/cassepipe/dot-git/blob/8b300524021cc74f677ada821e51a5cdd240a1f5/.zshrc#L116 https://github.com/cassepipe/dot-git/blob/8b300524021cc74f67...
- danielvaughn 4y ago
  Nice, I was just about to dive into tmux for the first time but I hate too much configuration, will check this out!
- mfontani 4y ago
  I use wezterm and love it, too - BUT, it doesn't yet support SSH agent forwarding, which are an integral part of my workflow for some machines. So it's great -- for me -- for local connections, or remote ones where I don't need to pass an SSH agent, but it's not yet there "fully" for me the way KiTTY is.
- imbnwa 4y ago
  Lua-scripted config with event dispatch is a huge win, totally not interested in polling and sed'ing just to get automatic dark mode
conaclos 4y ago
For the ones that love a more lightweight setup I recommend yash [0]. It is more lightweight than zsh, fish, or bash and comes with a decent auto-completion and line prediction a-la fish. For my prompt, I am using polygot [1]. However, I am looking for another one. I was previously a zsh user. I already tried fish, however, its non-POSIX-compliance was a hard stop for me. [0] https://yash.osdn.jp/ https://yash.osdn.jp/ [1] https://github.com/agkozak/polyglot https://github.com/agkozak/polyglot
jmmv 4y ago
I wrote a similar article years ago based on my setup to explain folks that asked how I organized projects and worked on them via tmux. The text is from 2015, but I still work mostly like that… although I’ve added VSCode and Doom Emacs into the mix. If you are curious: https://jmmv.dev/2015/09/my-coding-workflow.html https://jmmv.dev/2015/09/my-coding-workflow.html

167 points by behnamoh 4y ago

The main inconvenience of fish is not even having to go into another shell for some tasks like virtual env activation, but wondering whether some command you just ran silently did something wrong because of shell incompatibility. (Edited) Also, I wonder how fast is OMF compared to Starship?

buildbot 4y ago
Virtualenv supports fish just fine. . venv/bin/activate.fish
- throwaway290 4y ago
  Interesting, I didn't know they have a separate activate script now
rgoulter 4y ago
> The main inconvenience of fish is not even having to go into another shell for some tasks like virtual env activation For stuff like "in this directory, I want this virtual env activated", I'd recommend using direnv. https://direnv.net/ https://direnv.net/ > wondering whether some command you just ran silently did something wrong because of shell incompatibility I don't recall running into silent incompatibities. Do you have examples in mind? Although, yeah, you can't just copy-paste most sh/bash snippets into fish.
- throwaway290 4y ago
  I'm sure there are some ways it can fail silently, but excluding that I think of a function that fails loudly but higher-level function does not check that.
w23b07d28 4y ago
> The main inconvenience of fish is not even having to go into another shell for some tasks like virtual env activation, but wondering whether some command you just ran silently did something wrong because of shell incompatibility. I have the impression that you just overlook all the rest of the things that can go wrong when using Bash, because you are simply used to it, you know it and you know how it will behave. In the sense that with Dash you would perhaps have a similar problem. Fish is really pleasant and forgives a lot. > Also, I wonder how fast is OMF compared to Starship? Those are two total different projects. During my hypomania on Fish (yup), I didn't even use OMF, but added things manually and only those really needed, so that there was as little code to maintain as possible. Fish does not have a huge number of scripts, plug-ins. If Starship is too slow for you, you might like Tide. I found nothing more interesting, after which I returned to Starship anyway, but it's really fast. https://github.com/IlanCosman/tide https://github.com/IlanCosman/tide Perhaps you don't need something faster than Starship, just to configure Fish in such a way that it cleans itself of garbage and runs asynchronously?
- throwaway290 4y ago
  > I have the impression that you just overlook all the rest of the things that can go wrong when using Bash, because you are simply used to it, you know it and you know how it will behave I don't write much of bash or fish, I mean scripts written by others. Encounter cryptic error messages then realize script is just assuming shell is POSIX > Starship is too slow Starship plenty fast for me. You say it's completely different than OMF but from what I see they both exist to customize your prompt, no?
  - w23b07d28 4y ago
    > I don't write much of bash or fish, I mean scripts written by others. Encounter cryptic error messages then realize script is just assuming shell is POSIX I run most of my scripts in Bash, but what I can, I convert to Fish. If the advantages of Fish are less important than POSIX compliance, I won't suggest anything, because I have no need to be POSIX compliant, so maybe I don't really have the same concerns. :) > Starship plenty fast for me. You say it's completely different than OMF but from what I see they both exist to customize your prompt, no? Forgive me, I mistakenly assumed you meant that Starship runs too slowly. It depends on how you define prompt. Strictly it will be whatever is shown in the terminal when it waits for user input. OMF is a multi-tool that, in addition to modifying the appearance, acts as something like a plugin manager. Starship gives you "just the look". I think a good analogy would be to compare systemd and runit in 1 category.

asdfman123 4y ago

I’ve got a random question for the terminal folk: I’m often testing a web server hosted on a remote server that hot reloads, but I have to wait for it to finish compiling. I can tell it’s done if I have a tab open looking at the logs, but ideally I’d like some kind of icon that’s yellow when compiling, green when compiled, etc. What could I use for that?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
hboon 4y ago
If you mean to mix in GUI, on macOS, there is BitBar and another one (forgot the name) that just puts a big coloured dot in the menubar that you can curl to change its color. Something along that line would work.
- asdfman123 4y ago
  What about Linux?
akira2501 4y ago
tmux. If a bell, or ctrl-g, is output on the terminal, the tmux status line will indicate this fact if you are viewing a different terminal. It will stay indicating until you switch back to that terminal. tmux will also show you the name of the command that's currently running, so if it's a make file or other script that finishes, you can observe that on it's own, but if you add an `echo -e "\007"` to the end of your script, you'll get the indicator.
- asdfman123 4y ago
  Nice! I already use tmux. I’m not sure if the log file outputs anything like that though. There’s a way to hook into the build process and run commands after it completes. I’m guessing I might have to do that to get the status line wired in.
  - 4y ago

oplav 4y ago

> Capable terminal emulator (macOS’ Terminal.app doesn’t qualify) Why doesn't Terminal.app qualify? I used to use iTerm 2 because I liked its pane management, but after switching to using tmux several years ago, I've solely used Terminal.app + tmux without any issues in my workflow. What am I missing out on?

nntwozz 4y ago
I'm sure everyone has a favorite, mine is simply able to slide out iTerm2 from the top of the screen with a hotkey (tilde ofc.) à la Quake console. https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/48796/iterm-as-a-slide-out-terminal-from-the-top-of-the-screen https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/48796/iterm-as-a-s...
- Cthulhu_ 4y ago
  Same, lol; that really is the only unique selling point for me at the moment. Although I'm sure there's a lot of subtle things (performance, font rendering, tabs, etc) that do it for me as well.
  - microtonal 4y ago
    performance The latency of iTerm has traditionally been much worse than Terminal.app. It got a bit better with GPU rendering, but it still trails behind Terminal.app quite a bit. https://danluu.com/term-latency/ https://danluu.com/term-latency/ https://www.lkhrs.com/blog/2022/07/terminal-latency/ https://www.lkhrs.com/blog/2022/07/terminal-latency/ I tried iTerm for a while because Terminal.app does not support true color. But the difference in latency is definitely noticeable to me.
- jdalt 4y ago
  I use Alacritty as my terminal emulator plus hammerspoon to get the same effect.
  - tjfl 4y ago
    Would you be willing to share your Hammerspoon config, or at least that part? Would love to do this with Alacritty!

creamyhorror 4y ago

I installed Fish last night, first non-default shell I've used ever, because I saw Scott Hanselman's very pretty prompt and realised I'd been missing out. Those custom Bash prompts back in the day were positively primitive compared to what people have been doing with custom fonts and Unicode emoji symbols. Researched a bunch of themes/prompts, initially wanted oh-my-posh (which Hanselman uses), then Starship.rs because it was fast, then powerlevel10k because it was faster, then saw opinions in favour of Fish over Zsh, sidetripped to r/UnixPorn along the way, and finally settled on Fish + Fisher (plugin manager) + Tide (a Fish port of powerlevel10k) + Catppuccin Fish (a pastel theme). The configuration wizard in Tide makes it very simple to pick the prompt's design and colours, and further customisation is easy too. Quite a rabbithole, but I'm pretty satisfied now!

rndmize 4y ago
Also on the Fish + Fisher + Tide train. I've been using fish for some years now, always been a fan of the autocomplete and highlighting, but Tide feels like a step up. Really like the way it shows my node version on the right is a relevant project.
- artdigital 4y ago
  Also a fish user here, but didn't find a need for Fisher yet. What packages did you install? I used it to install z but every upgrade with fisher just messed things up, so I killed it from my setup and settled on zoxide which has proper fish bindings Now I just use fish + starship and don't mess around with packages
  - gravlaks 4y ago
    Here's mine: fisher install PatrickF1/fzf.fish fisher install urbainvaes/fzf-marks # These two to get sdkman and nvm to work in fish, IIRC fisher install reitzig/sdkman-for-fish@v1.4.0 fisher install jorgebucaran/nvm.fish
  - 7839284023 4y ago
    I like https://github.com/meaningful-ooo/sponge https://github.com/meaningful-ooo/sponge > Sponge quietly runs in the background and keeps your shell history clean from typos, incorrectly used commands and everything you don't want to store due to privacy reasons. ___ Also here is a nice list you can take a lookt at: https://github.com/jorgebucaran/awsm.fish https://github.com/jorgebucaran/awsm.fish

lordgrenville 4y ago

I tried Fish for a while, and found the three things I liked most about it were all available as addons for zsh, so I went back to zsh with just these three lines appended to .zshrc: source /usr/share/zsh-syntax-highlighting/zsh-syntax-highlighting.zsh source /usr/share/zsh-autosuggestions/zsh-autosuggestions.zsh source /usr/share/zsh-abbr/zsh-abbr.zsh (In case it's not clear, install them with your system package manager.)

em-bee 4y ago
i love it when innovations in a new application are carried over to older tools. zsh seems especially suitable for that. it soaks up good ideas like a sponge and finds a way to integrate them. on the other hand it does make zsh feel kind of overwhelming at times in terms of options available. my favorite part besides autosuggestions is the way history works, not incremental but i can type out a search term, and then start searching up and down the history. incremental search is always irritating me by showing me irrelevant stuff while i am still typing, which i find distracting because i have to process it while at the same time focusing on typing the search term right. now if only i could also have multiple search terms... (i also prefer the fish syntax, but that is more of a matter of taste and getting used to)
- nickjj 4y ago
  > (i also prefer the fish syntax, but that is more of a matter of taste and getting used to) IMO one of the biggest advantages of zsh is it's almost 100% compatible with Bash. If I'm in my shell and want to run an adhoc command with a for loop I want to do it with Bash's syntax, not learn a new Fish syntax. Having to manually drop into `bash` to run a bunch of commands is too inconvenient. Also you'll find most examples online using POSIX shell or Bash compatible syntax. You can carry over those to your dedicated scripts and adhoc commands. Your knowledge becomes shared.
  - EdwardDiego 4y ago
    A Fish for loop is near identical to a Bash for loop, it simply omits the "do".

blacklight 4y ago

I've been giving fish a try on a periodic basis every 6 months or so. The pattern is always the same: I read an amazing article on how fish makes X easier/fancier than bash/zsh, I install it again, I spend half a day trying to export my two decades of bash/zsh customizations, and eventually I just give up overwhelmed by the amount of required work. Fish is a great shell, but I don't know why they decided to go all the way and completely break the compatibility with anything that POSIX has produced over the past four decades. I won't rewrite all of my shell functions, aliases, for loops, string concatenations and environment variables to comply with a shell that is only compliant with itself, sorry. And I don't know why they decided to go the nuclear way and break compatibility so hard where they could have at least guaranteed a back-compatibility layer with (at least) zsh. Reinventing the whole wheel to make it look exactly the way you want, while disregarding compatibility with everything that already exists, is probably the biggest violation of the UNIX philosophy.

em-bee 4y ago
then fish is maybe not for you for now. i like fish exactly because it broke out of the limitations imposed by POSIX. in my view, POSIX should have never even gone as far as specifying any kind of shell syntax. imagine what we'd do if it had gone even as far as specifying programming languages. that stuff just doesn't belong there. compatibility should be limited to interoperability. but it should not limit how we can design our tools. and the tools do adapt. more and more of them work just fine with fish. maybe some day in the future your tools will work with fish too. I spend half a day trying to export my two decades of bash/zsh customizations don't. if you switch to fish, you should not want/need those customizations, because if you want to make fish look or work like your old shell, why are you even switching? you are learning a new environment with new features. get used to fish as it is first. after a while you may discover fish's own customization options, and the many tools that provide customizations across multiple shells. your own handcoded adaptions are probably not even portable to any other shell. Reinventing the whole wheel to make it look exactly the way you want, while disregarding compatibility with everything that already exists, is probably the biggest violation of the UNIX philosophy fish is not reinventing the wheel. it is creating new wheels with features that we never had before. the popularity of fish just shows that this incompatibility is not a problem to many. if it were, fish would be dead by now. other shells are gaining ground that also break compatibility and maybe we'll find a future where these compatibility issues are not issues anymore because we will have learned to build environments that don't depend on that compatibility.

outluch 4y ago

My trivial setup with tmux + oh-my-zsh + mosh(if firewall allows). Enjoying it in every machine I touch. https://gitlab.com/outluch/osetup https://gitlab.com/outluch/osetup

Bishnu00 4y ago

I used fish extensively a few months ago, had to switch back to bash for some reasons, but yeah fish is incredible.

cassepipe 4y ago

Instead of tmux, I personnally use Wez's Terminal (Wezterm: https://wezfurlong.org/wezterm/ https://wezfurlong.org/wezterm/) because it is both a capable terminal and a capable multiplexer and I like to have one less layer to care about. One thing I personally like very much is that it supports a command line tab and pane navigation/management : https://github.com/cassepipe/dot-git/blob/8b300524021cc74f677ada821e51a5cdd240a1f5/.zshrc#L116 https://github.com/cassepipe/dot-git/blob/8b300524021cc74f67...

danielvaughn 4y ago
Nice, I was just about to dive into tmux for the first time but I hate too much configuration, will check this out!
mfontani 4y ago
I use wezterm and love it, too - BUT, it doesn't yet support SSH agent forwarding, which are an integral part of my workflow for some machines. So it's great -- for me -- for local connections, or remote ones where I don't need to pass an SSH agent, but it's not yet there "fully" for me the way KiTTY is.
imbnwa 4y ago
Lua-scripted config with event dispatch is a huge win, totally not interested in polling and sed'ing just to get automatic dark mode

conaclos 4y ago

For the ones that love a more lightweight setup I recommend yash [0]. It is more lightweight than zsh, fish, or bash and comes with a decent auto-completion and line prediction a-la fish. For my prompt, I am using polygot [1]. However, I am looking for another one. I was previously a zsh user. I already tried fish, however, its non-POSIX-compliance was a hard stop for me. [0] https://yash.osdn.jp/ https://yash.osdn.jp/ [1] https://github.com/agkozak/polyglot https://github.com/agkozak/polyglot

jmmv 4y ago

I wrote a similar article years ago based on my setup to explain folks that asked how I organized projects and worked on them via tmux. The text is from 2015, but I still work mostly like that… although I’ve added VSCode and Doom Emacs into the mix. If you are curious: https://jmmv.dev/2015/09/my-coding-workflow.html https://jmmv.dev/2015/09/my-coding-workflow.html