Baby here about to start using linux, however i'm wondering If I should start off just using bash or should I switch to something right away like zsh or fish. I've heard they're much better/more powerful. Which shell do you use and why?
Bash is fine for 99% of people who don't have boners for shell scripting.
I use bash because using linux is hard enough.
Zsh&Prezto
Cause autocomplete and rice.
>baby here
>about to start using linux
>absolutely no fucking clue about the differences between them
>guys do i need them??
Cease breathing lad.
You will not benefit from using meme shells if you have no idea what they do.
>>51655268
I understand that zsh is more refined, has auto complete, and is more customizeable to be able to make your time using the command line more streamlined and simple, I have a pretty good idea of what they do from reading up on it
Zsh because I have a boner for shell scripting
>>51655305
Don't let that idiot discourage you, you're already way ahead if you're reading about this while "about to start using linux", the only downside to going straight to Zsh is you'll never know how pale Bash is in comparison.
>>51655305
le epic raisu shells are like modding, you have to get knee deep in shit with the default, unadultered experience to be able to appreciate the change later on
>using an insecure shell
might as well just use winblows
>>51655216
I didn't know you could use something else so easily for a long time. Bash fucking sucks and is absolutely stupid.
Switched to fish and couldn't be happier. Just werks.
Tried zsh earler today because it gets shilled with autocompletion and whatnot but out of the box it didn't do anything more than stupid bash does. In fact it did less, it didn't display my cd or anything and definitely didn't have the autocomplete, highlighting, etc people keep shilling about.
>>51656480
could you enlighten me a little on fish, tell me what it's like, what's good/bad about it, might look into using this since it doesn't seem to need a whole lot of configuration
>>51655216
rc, the best shell
I would say if you're going to write a shell script that anyone else will use, write it in bash, because anyone else will have bash.
If you're just going to use the command line and small scripts for yourself, something noobfriendly like fish is a good choice
>>51656642
will bash scripts work in the likes of zsh or fish?
>>51655216
>Baby here
should have been aborted desu
For gods sakes, just use bash. And possibly learn UNIX sh standards and the difference between it and bash ("bash-isms") for interoperability with BSD and other OSes.
Any other shell is used by 0.000000000000001% of the population and is statistically worthless.
I use fish. Simply because I like the autosuggestions.
>>51656670
It doesn't matter, you'll still have bash installed. If a script is written in bash and has the appropriate shebang line, it will run using bash, even if that's not your default shell.
>>51655236
>boners for shell scripting.
What? no no no, do not use zsh for scripting, use sh, or bash.
But zsh on the cmd line rocks.
bindkey -v ftw.
>>51656480
>it did less
You must be on some poxy distro, cos it autocompletes for me straight away.
>>51656711
>statistically worthless.
Thats just plain wrong, all the unix programmers I know use zsh. Bash is good for scripting, cos its quite strict, in that sense its the successor to the bourne shell, but zsh for day to day use is far more powerful.
I've been using the fish shell for years now. Tried zsh, but didn't see the point of it. All the functionality I was used to were plugins with zsh. The man-page auto completion, and history fuzzy search was all I really needed. Guess I don't care for all the ricer shit like battery percentage, current disk-usage, or knowing what current branch I'm on when using Git.
Also, if you're doing any sort of scripting, do yourself a favor and use python/ruby or something other than bash. It just makes it easier for all of us. Our deployment scripts were millions lines of bash, and we removed 75% of it by switching to Python.
>>51658128
>use python/ruby or something other than bash.
Have to agree with this, really unless you're writing some system level thing you're better off toolsmithing in python,ruby, even perl.
>>51655216
There is no reason to use anything else but Bash.
>>51658521
Too clunky, its too gnu'ish, it wants you to use emacs commands.
Finally, the bash man page itself, says "It's too big and too slow. "
zsh + omz if I need something posix compliant
majority of the time fish + omf
zsh for interactive usage
ksh93 for speed
>>51655216
bourne/sh because it's the default on slowlaris and I'm used to it anyway
>>51657971
>all the unix programmers I know use zsh
anecdote, consider that like 0 distros ship with zsh
>Bash is good for scripting, cos its quite strict
lolwut?
I use zsh but neither of these are good arguments for it. Honestly not being familiar with bash is a liability, it's pervasive while zsh and fish are not, it's what everyone knows.
>>51658128
>history fuzzy search
history | grep command_name
problem solved in any shell ever
>>51660499
>problem solved in any shell ever
The bourne shell doesnt have the history command. Maybe you should refrain from commenting until you have enough experience to actualy have a clue.
>>51660480
>>Bash is good for scripting, cos its quite strict
>lolwut?
You havent written many scripts have you.
>>51660683
>ctrl-r
>alt-p
>ctrl-s
>alt-n
>alt-<
>alt->
>history | grep <command>
Lolwut? Bourne shell has like seven history commands.
>>51655305
>has auto complete
Bash has OKish tab completion
>more streamlined and simple
Then why do i see everyone with a ZSH shell has some ungodly multiline PS1 with all sorts of colors? What happened to username:cwd$ ?
>>51661935
Those aint Bourne shell commands n00b.
Now get the fuck off my lawn.
