bash?

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

26 events

when toggle format	what		by	license	comment
Jan 5, 2016 at 19:11	review	Close votes
Jan 5, 2016 at 22:08
Dec 31, 2015 at 19:02	history	tweeted			twitter.com/StackUnix/status/682637907375591424
Dec 31, 2015 at 13:56	history	reopened	Ulrich Schwarz jasonwryan Michael Homer G-Man Says 'Reinstate Monica' Jules
Dec 31, 2015 at 8:42	comment	added	Wildcard		I think there are many excellent objective answers which have been given...but I wouldn't mind seeing this question "protected."
Dec 30, 2015 at 6:40	review	Reopen votes
Dec 30, 2015 at 8:54
Dec 30, 2015 at 6:38	history	closed	muru cuonglm slm♦		Opinion-based
Dec 30, 2015 at 3:04	review	Close votes
Dec 30, 2015 at 6:38
Dec 24, 2015 at 7:23	comment	added	Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen		"pretty much" is not the same as "always". /bin/sh is always there. Guaranteed.
Dec 23, 2015 at 13:46	comment	added	schily		`#!/bin/sh` should not be used if a script contains `bashisms` but it is also good practice to try to write scripts in a way that would allow execution with the `SVr4 Bourne Shell`. Compatibility with the `SVr4 Bourne Shell` can be checked using the `osh` binary from the Schily Bourne Shell schilytools.sourceforge.net/bosh.html
Dec 23, 2015 at 7:35	comment	added	mikeserv		@JdeBP - i don't think so. the only way you could is to first assume the opinion of the asker - which means to take as a given that there might be some reason to do `#!/bin/bash`.
Dec 23, 2015 at 5:36	comment	added	Jules		@user2338816 my bad, I meant objective. Thanks for your points!
Dec 23, 2015 at 5:18	comment	added	user2338816		@JulesMazur `...the answers so far are fairly subjective...` A "subjective" statement is essentially opinion-based by definition. `/bin/bash` should only be used when bash is explicitly needed. In 40+ years as a developer, long before `bash`, I almost never explicitly needed it except when testing. (I also strive to avoid shell extensions, but most of my scripts are intended for distribution.) Many scripts on the net should also be intended for wide use.
Dec 23, 2015 at 1:05	answer	added	Paul Evans		timeline score: 0
Dec 22, 2015 at 19:21	comment	added	sixtyfootersdude		@purplepsycho - This is only true if you test and verify that your script doesn't use specific bash functions. See my answer for more info.
Dec 22, 2015 at 19:20	answer	added	sixtyfootersdude		timeline score: 8
Dec 22, 2015 at 18:24	comment	added	JdeBP		I believe that it is possible to answer this question without involving mere opinion, by pointing to at least two organizations that addressed this very thing over a number of years, and looking at the history and outcome. With plenty of further reading attached, to boot. ☺
Dec 22, 2015 at 18:14	answer	added	JdeBP		timeline score: 20
Dec 22, 2015 at 17:14	comment	added	Jules		@mikeserv I intended for this question to be more about best practices than opinion - and the answers so far are fairly subjective, at least IMO (no meta-humour intended!). I'm open to hearing more about whether or not, and why, this would qualify as opinion, though.
Dec 22, 2015 at 16:47	review	Close votes
Dec 22, 2015 at 20:14
Dec 22, 2015 at 16:31	comment	added	mikeserv		in general you should avoid asking questions which lend themselves to answers based on opinion (which is the only possible way i believe this question can be answered - but that's just my opinion).
Dec 22, 2015 at 15:59	vote	accept	Jules
Dec 22, 2015 at 15:53	answer	added	zwol		timeline score: 5
Dec 22, 2015 at 15:19	answer	added	user79743		timeline score: 26
Dec 22, 2015 at 14:02	answer	added	Marco		timeline score: 84
Dec 22, 2015 at 13:52	comment	added	Mathieu		It's a good partice to use `/bin/sh` if you do not use specific `bash` functions. One day you could have to use one of your script on a system on which it is not installed (remote server, embedded computer...)
Dec 22, 2015 at 13:45	history	asked	Jules	CC BY-SA 3.0

toggle format