Switched to Bash and Comparison of Shells
malcolm.kay at internode.on.net
Fri Jun 11 02:16:46 UTC 2010
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 02:49 am, Dan D Niles wrote:
> I had been using csh/tcsh for 20 years and I just switched to
> bash. The recent discussion about the differences between the
> shells prompted me to take another look at bash. I thought
> I'd share my perception of the differences between tcsh and
It seems to me that it is a little late in the day to be changing
to bash. Some well known Linux distributions are beginning to see
that some non-posix features of bash can create difficulties. I
believe recent releases of Ubuntu use dash as the prefered
shell, and it looks as though Debian will be going the same way.
Dash is supposed to be a modern, faster and cleaner
implementation of sh -- if installed through FBSD ports it has
the same man page as sh.
> The big thing tcsh is lacking, and the reason I switched, is
> the lack of sensible redirection (as some call it).
> Specifically, not being able to do 'command 2>/dev/null
> >/somefile' is why I switched.
I'm also a long time csh/tcsh user (somewhat more than 20 years)
and freely admit that redirection at the command line can
occassionally be a problem. I've always used sh for any serious
Unless you wish to play with one or other fairly common but
lesser known shells such as zsh or ksh then I would suggest that
sh or dash (perhaps with a -E or -V option for interactive use)
would be more appropriate than bash in a modern OS.
But ultimately each to his own.
More information about the freebsd-questions