Re: Shell Games
From: Nikolas Britton (freebsd_at_nbritton.org)
Date: 12/31/04
- Previous message: cmc3list-bsd_at_yahoo.com: "freebsd-users list"
- In reply to: Mike Jeays: "Re: Shell Games"
- Next in thread: John Murphy: "Re: Shell Games"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 18:11:34 -0600 To: Mike Jeays <Mike.Jeays@rogers.com>
Mike Jeays wrote:
>On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 13:00, Jeff Lewis wrote:
>
>
>> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>> * *
>> * Sue & Greg: Please don't hesitate to suggest that I take these *
>> * comments to a more appropriate list. I do not want *
>> * them to just be allowed as in times past. *
>> * *
>> * I believe that all of these postings are within *
>> * the list's charter. Perhaps they will be a good *
>> * example. If not, then perhaps I will concur with *
>> * you both that the list should be disbanded. But *
>> * I figure that I have roughly 30 days to push the *
>> * envelope. Be purists so that newbies understand. *
>> * *
>> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>>
>>FIRST
>>-----
>>I chose FreeBSD to house my company's new external web server primarily
>>because of it's stability. I've only played with linux, but enough to
>>feel like I was on a real whirlwind of updates all the time. I figured
>>that if FreeBSD was stable enough for Yahoo, Google and Pair (my ISP)
>>to base THEIR business on, then it should be stable enough for this
>>little business as well.
>>
>>SECOND
>>------
>>I have time. I have 3-6 months to get this box up, stable and secure.
>>Security is this huge black hole for me. I don't even know enough to
>>know how much I don't know. I am chomping at the bit to learn.
>>
>>THIRD
>>-----
>>I primarily come from an MSDOS 3.0 - 6.22 world. I beta tested Win95.
>>I barely used Win98, preferring WinNT. But I've used a multitude of
>>computers throughout my career, including TRS-DOS, Concurrent CPM,
>>PR1MOS, and tons of embedded stuff. I spent roughly 25 years in an
>>electronics manufacturing environment. I got into IT as a Netware 3
>>and 4 administrator. Took a job at a fast growing company in the
>>center of a major US city and helped them setup WinNT servers, as
>>well as create a WAN throughout the US. The corporate mandate there
>>was Microsoft. No FOSS whatsover, period.
>>
>>Today, I am an administrator for a small Microsoft based Win2k3/WinXP
>>network, in a small company, located only 2 miles from my home. I am 47,
>>eat lunch at home everyday and see my wife and teenagers every night.
>>
>>But I choose what we run here. We were bound to an app that mandated
>>Microsoft SQL Server. We had no such mandate for the new web server.
>>
>>
>>AND FINALLY!
>>------------
>>I have played with Unix, or worked in a very small way on production
>>SunOS computers off and on for years. I never understood the whole
>>concept of multiple shells and/or scripting languages. I've read about
>>them, but there MUST be some teflon in the cranium somewhere.
>>
>>I understand this next question could invoke what I've termed digital
>>zealotry, but as a FreeBSD newbie, I gotta know.
>>
>>Why are there so many different shells? Does each shell interface
>>directly with the kernel independantly? AND (here it comes) which is
>>the [right one/best one] to use?
>>
>>
>
>There are several shells because each author felt he could improve on
>what had been done before - and to scratch a personal itch, perhaps.
>There isn't a 'best' shell - this is the stuff of flamewars.
>
>My personal preference is Bash. It is readily available on most Unixes,
>and has a good selection of features. I don't so much like the csh/tcsh
>family, which have a somewhat different syntax.
>
>It pays to learn one thoroughly - they are so similar that if you use
>several, it is easy to get confused.
>
>
>>I guess I am TOO comfortable with the command.com/batch file world
>>and that I need to open my mind a little. I've always felt that CMD/Batch
>>was more of a limiting factor than a plus, but I could alway use KIX
>>or Novell's login scripts to get network scripting done. For everything
>>else, there was perl. I never had to chang a shell, replaced command.com.
>>Just used a different scripting language. Perl has existed a lot longer
>>in the unix world than the MS world. Why not script everything in that?
>>
>>So why CSHELL as a shell AND a scripting language, BASH as a shell AND
>>a scripting language? SHELL, CSHELL and BASH all on the same machine?
>>Do they have specific purposes? Should I log in as root using one type
>>of shell but log in as my user account using another type of shell?
>>
>>
>
>There is no reason to have separate shells for batch and interactive use
>- this just increases the learning curve.
>
>Many people recommend keeping sh as the root shell for FreeBSD, but lots
>more disagree. The benefit is that sh should always be available, even
>in a badly crippled machine. (If even sh won't work, the machine is
>probably toast)
>
>
I thought csh was the default shell for freebsd....yea it is:
root:********************************:0:0::0:0:Charlie &:/root:/bin/csh
>>I guess that I am leaning towards BASH for everything. I have an
>>O'Reilly book for BASH. But if I do so, am I missing some rich feature
>>set somewhere else?
>>
>>Is there a good rule of thumb for when I should not use a BASH script
>>and go to a PERL script?
>>
>>
>
>If you can't do it easily in Bash, then using Perl makes sense. It
>depends on your skill level - Bash can do just about anything, but the
>harder things are very tricky sometimes.
>
>
>>URLs gladly accepted for places to learn more.
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>>
Do you remember the TMTOWTDI motto for perl and the underlying message
in it jeff?......
_______________________________________________
freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-newbies
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-newbies-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: cmc3list-bsd_at_yahoo.com: "freebsd-users list"
- In reply to: Mike Jeays: "Re: Shell Games"
- Next in thread: John Murphy: "Re: Shell Games"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
