>using a shell other than bash for what purpose?

>>60247624
fun, curiosity or features.

>>60247624
Bash isn't preinstalled and openbsd-pdksh, the default shell, does everything I need. On systems with Bash as default I use mksh for a more uniform experience.

cool kid points on /g/

fish has a funny name

rice

>>60247624
>>using a shell other than command.com
>for what purpose?

>>60247624
Better interactive features.

>mpv anim
>tab
>mpv [meme subgroup name]animutitle02.mkv
And then tab to cycle through animutitle02, and so on.

>>60248273
>And then tab to cycle through animutitle02, and so on.
That's exactly what I hate in zsh. That completion method is totally retarded.

>>60247624
being posix compliant ?

>using a shell at all when everything can be configured with GUI since Windows XP

>>60247624
the real question is - why would you want to use bash if you have the choice? zsh is better than bash and also isn't under a viral license.

>>60247624
>using a terminal emulator other than xterm
for what purpose?

>>60248445
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_(computing)
>In computing, a shell is a user interface for access to an operating system's services. In general, operating system shells use either a command-line interface (CLI) or graphical user interface (GUI), depending on a computer's role and particular operation. It is named a shell because it is a layer around the operating system kernel.[1][2]

Zsh has good tab completion and muh rice

>>60248165
unfortunately, fish and most other shells like scsh and xonsh are not compatible with bourne shell, which causes untold problems with various unix applications like vim and emacs that assume that you are using a bourne shell. thus, it is safe to assume that those of you who use those shells aren't experienced enough to realize how important being bourne shell compatible is - sorry, but it's inescapable.

This only leaves bourne shell reimplementations like dash, bourne shell extensions like bash, and kornshells like pdksh and zsh. Of those, zsh is the clear winner in terms of both features and license.

File: 1475117743510.jpg (222KB, 914x1200px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 914x1200px

>>60248614
>unix applications like vim and emacs
what

>>60248614
>zsh is the clear winner in terms of both features and license.

gpl > cuck license
lightweight bash > bloated zsh

File: roskiin.jpg (134KB, 778x1018px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 778x1018px

>>60248445
>being this retartded

>>60248515
>using zsh for muh rice
look at this retard, look at him and laugh

>>60248919
Applications that are designed to run on *nix systems with associated assumptions (like the availability of bash).

>>60247624
Why use the command line when we have GUIs? Like yeah in the 90s GUIs had a performance hit but no modern system uses real resources for a desktop.

>>60249648
faster than clicking through menus, do more than one thing in 1 command & script them etc.?

>>60247624
bash fucking sucks

I use korn shell because I like the band korn

>>60248934
"bloat" is a thought-terminating cliche for people incapable of arguing why more features and customization possibilities are a bad thing.

>>60250580
You're saying that to someone who used "cuck" for a copyleft software license.

It's no use.

>>60249679
Partitioning my disks is a metric ton easier to do in gparted than in any cli

>>60251631
Nothing is easier to use than fdisk.

>>60251699
How about cfdisk?

>>60247624
Hipster syndrome

>>60251742
No. I use fdisk for years and it works perfectly.

File: 1490461910197.png (2MB, 1920x2150px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x2150px

>>60247624
I use bash even if i'm on openbsd, because
>muh compatibility

>>60251793
Just because fdisk is perfectly usable doesn't mean cfdisk isn't more isn't nicer.

I don't care to remember the line editor syntax, so a tui goes a long way.

>>60247624
/g/ cred

>>60251813
fdisk is self documented. You need to remember nothing.

>>60251843
I don't care. I'd rather use something that's intuitive when i almost always use the same three features.

>>60251866
fdisk is fucking intuitive

>>60251884
Yeah and ed is the standard text editor.

7/10 i fell for it

>>60251902
Are you an cfdisk guy or a gparted toddler?

>>60251902
I use ed a lot on my android phone, Because it's fast. But I prefer GNU Emacs when I can use it.

when you open your autistichatRC and your old pal logs in to mention he's making 100K doing "noob sheep consumer pleb babby butt shit" and you are still in the basement at 45 and he OWNS a multi-level-basement so you turbo uninstall the software from the circlejerk server but it's still running since he won't log out because he keeps spamming kill yourself and you don't want to ruin your uptime but then you realise hey I can just spend the next 30 years jerking off so you install some even more obscure shitty turd then you wake up and it's 30 fucking years later and you are in a spaceship labeled "fucking worthless ass faggots" as the world has exploded after the singularity which was 2mainstream for you and then you realize that they televise hurling cheetos into the room with all the other spergs and call it "zsh the sport" and you can't kill yourself, fuck off, or die, so everyone whips out a laptop and starts crying into their craptops and the network executive of the show is your friend who made 100K 30 years ago and he uses ubuntu now

>>60249572
You can have bash installed for compatibility without using it as your login/terminal emulator shell.

File: 5L3D9Eo.png (34KB, 130x124px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 130x124px

>>60251953
You, I like you.

>>60249648
You need to understand that a GUI isn't a substitution for a TUI, but represents a different approach. For most it's effectively a substitiution because they never need the advantages of a TUI which a GUI can't provide by its nature, but it's still not a substitiution in a general sense.

>>60248467
Serious question. What real avantage do other terminal emulators offer? If bash "oughtta be enuff for anybody", then why not just stick with xterm too?

>>60250580
"bloat" manifests if the features regarded extraneous get in the user's way, affect performance in a detrimental way, create unnecesary security liabilities, occupy disk space/memory unnecessarily, while providing no advantages which would make the above sacrifices worthwhile.

>>60253216
Well not being a complete turd that even the manual of advise against using might be a start.

Xterm is fine if what you want is obscure terminal support, but you can do better in this day and age.

Try alacritty for instance, GPU accelerated rendering is something xterm will by design never be able to do.

>>60253697
why do I need GPU acceleration for a text terminal?

>>60253270
none of these apply to zsh.

zsh features don't get in your way, it has a helpful first time setup that you can bypass and ignore forever if you want. the rest of the features are just stuff you toggle on in your zshrc.

without anything enabled, zsh is lightning quick and doesn't take up much resident memory. even my modestly tricked out zsh takes up less resident memory than bash with a default debian config

performance wise I've never seen it compare unfavorably to bash, though I have admittedly only used a small fraction of its total feature set.

as for disk space, zsh takes up about 1-2 megabytes installed, bash takes up 5.

as for security, it has a single CVE assigned to it ever, compared to 12 for bash, which includes Shellshock.

Because ksh came with OpenBSD, and I'm fine with it.

>>60247624
because zsh is usable for using.

I only use bash as an "ok" scripting language that kind of works most times if you know the in's and out's and it's better than only bourne or almquist shell "no features" bullshit.

>not using zsh

>>60248194
This is some advanced shilling

>>60253179
You mean CLI, not TUI.

>>60255403
they probably meant cmd.exe

command.com was the DOS interpreter that was also used for windows 9x. anybody who has fond memories of windows 9x probably doesn't remember the incredible amounts of blue-screening - it was so shit that at one point uptimes over 47 days were literally impossible due to integer wraparound bugs.

>>60253697
why the FUCK do you need GPU acceleration in a terminal emulator

>>60255660
better question - why would you not want GPU acceleration of - forget a terminal - anything on your desktop?

something has put in the legwork to actually to render the terminal to a pixel buffer or texture, it's either gonna be your GPU or your CPU, why not use the GPU if it's available and faster?

>>60255361
Is zsh really that good? I like the idea of portability for my scripts, and practicing with bash all the time helps for when I have to use it.

>>60255865
I'm not even sure that's an option on my machine.
It's nearly 10 years old and opengl support goes up to 2.1

drop * from table

>>60255869
don't use zsh for shell scripts if that's what you're worried about. just use it for interactive use.

>>60255873
I find it very hard to believe that your system is incapable of the task. OSX has been GPU-rendering desktops since the very first version back at the turn of the century, Windows has been doing it since Vista. If you're having trouble, it's probably because it's another episode of "lol linux desktop".

PowerShell for repl-based debugging of .NET software, and for having a half-decent shell when forced to use Windows.

>>60254753
Imagine your terminal with full OpenGL 4.2, CUDA, and PhysX support!

>>60255439
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text-based_user_interface
>Text-based user interface (TUI), also called textual user interface or terminal user interface
>Not to be confused with Command-line interface.

>>60248450
>zsh is better
how

>>60255869
if you want your scripts to be portable you should probably write them for plain sh

>>60248934
I don't really know this stuff well, but bash is made by gnu right? Is it really a less bloated option? That would make me feel better about not bothering to change it.