Slashdot Mirror
Bash 3.0 Released
qazwsx789 writes "The first public release of bash-3.0 is now available via ftp and from the usual GNU mirror sites. For the official release notes by the author, Chet Ramey, check his usenet post."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
...a GTK front end
Bash was my first shell and I used it exclusively for years. One day, I'd read enough about zsh to force myself to give it a try. Oh how I loved thee, bash, but I won't be going back.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Hell, I didn't even know bash was still in active development. It was always just bash to me, not bash-x.y.z. But then I guess I wouldn't notice the difference, really.
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
What are these, I wonder? Something along the lines of changing the prompt to always display [litigious@bastards]$, perhaps?
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
Someone tell me why I want this. The Usenet post doesn't seem to explain what's so exciting about it, besides a bunch of boring bug-fixes, and some esoteric-sounding syntax changes.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Doesn't seem to be much changed given the version number increase. [[ =~ ]] can match regexes and it can do zsh style {1..3} expansions. Improved multibyte support too. There were bigger changes in some of the 2.0x updates.
I am looking at the title going a Linux bash headline on slashdot, now i must have been dreaming. But I am sure that i would not post that here, knowing i would loose all my karma in one stroke.
It's nice to see yet more contributions from Apple to the OSS community.
Several bug fixes for POSIX compliance came in from Apple; their assistance is appreciated.
It looks like Apple is giving back to the community, and to a fundamental tool.
To the parent: I'm in the same boat. I thought bash 3?? What is there to add?? Looks like multibyte char support (sorry, I'm are a dum Amer'kin).
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
Why use a middleman when you have access to the source?
Meh.
They should have called the movie Bourne Again.
The Bourne Again and Again and Again Shell! Again!
I have discovered a truly marvelous
Yeah, Bash 3.0 is great and all, but when are the bash people going to upgrade rbash? Man, I can't do anything with that shell!
I seriously hope they've fixed that bag. Since a lot of GNU/LNUX distros don't even ship with a real sh, but symlink to bash. Some random linux bozo makes a #!/bin/sh script thinking it will be portable, but bash (at least 2.x does) forgets to switch off some features when invoked as /bin/sh, so in the end you write a non-portable script. And listen, linux people, /bin/bash is not standard!
Alfred, tired of fixing stupid scripts that assume the whole world has bash in /bin.
Looks like a nice Unicode-savvy release that should help with dealing with international languages at the command line. And yay to Apple for giving back (again). When will people finally accept that Apple is indeed helping out the OSS community through GCC, bash, and other tools...?
Kind of off-topic, but for speed purposes in scripts that have to run fast, I find nothing better or more convenient than Ash, especially on systems where
Does anyone know any history on this shell? Is it a clone of the original bourne shell or of bash? I can't seem to find anything useful on Google
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
I can't be the only one who snickers every time I see a commercial for this film. Think Geek used to have a "Bourne Again Believer" t-shirt but I think they dropped it. Maybe I am the only one.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
There's been an interesting little problem caused for people like Gentoo with the updates in bash 3.0.
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58703
Just a simple move towards compliance breaks most of their scripts, so they've had to patch it out.
Lovely.
"How fine you look when dressed in rage."
Ha ha, you dorks, use MSH like a man!
:-o
I wonder how this will get modded?
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Then I looked through the POSIX spec, and sure enough I found this section, which explained things:
POSIX section 23.4.18 (SHELL):
Everything else, I do in emacs...
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
What is so hot about bash, e.g. compared to zsh?
Seriously, I'm not trying to start a flame war here. This is coming from a really long term zsh user because back when I was just starting unix and linux a fellow bearded unix guru told me something along the lines "go with zsh, it's the best" (thas was about -95). And I've never looked back, but now seing bash being the default shell in most distros I've began to wonder what's going on. Perhaps over the years bash overtook zsh or there are some hidden qualities in bash that I don't know about.
Anyone with some insight on _both_ shells would be greatly appreciated.
1 Earth is warming, 2 It's us, 3 it's royally bad, 4 we need to take action NOW
Gentoo's various scripts rely on the fact that /bin/sh is usually symlinked to /bin/bash. With 3.0, when invoked as /bin/sh, bash behaves as it should for the first time, which caused some problems. (which are now fixed, by the way)
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
Ok, please tell me how I can change the SOA on 150 domain files all at once with pointing and clicking. In bash, it's: sed -i s/oldSOA/newSOA/g * Until there's a way to do search and replace on any number of files that's easier than that, the command line will still be useful.
Find out about the Lexus Rx400h Hybrid!
I read the announcement and it mentions "History traversal with arrow keys", but what I would really like doesn't seem to be mentioned (but perhaps it is possible with bash-2.05, I'm not much of a shell expert). In Matlab, the up-arrow key searches the history for commands that match all the characters on the line. No characters and it acts like a normal bash arrow, if "figure, plot" is at the beginning of the line, it will quickly scroll through all plotting commands that have been entered at the shell.
Any idea if this is possible?
Dara Parsavand
Bash is a portable tool that existed long before Linux did. It is not specific or particular to Linux. So why in the world does this get posted under the category of Linux ?
Bash can now store timestamps in the history and save them to the history file. This alone is worth the upgrade for me. The option to erase duplicates is pretty nice too.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
The same can happen using the shell.
When you run a binary from the shell are you ever sure what files it's accessing?
If you log it, sure -- but there are tools to do that in the GUI, too.
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
This story comes under category Linux, wonders why? As we know bash runs under all *nix :)
The important thing is not to stop questioning --Albert Einstein.
The completion ability of bash has been steadily improving. There is a nice script here that sets up a lot of good completion rules for bash.
You like using a GUI and I like using a terminal. We're two people with two preferred methods of interacting with our machines. Your way is superior - for you. My way is superior - for me. There is no point (or obligation) to argue about which is better, since "better" is not a well-ordered set in this case.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Guys, I'm really so excited about this. I ran around proclaiming the news about bash-3.0 in my department. Not too many people got excited (I work in Psychology) but check this out:
[user@mitral user]$ echo $BASH_VERSION
2.05a.0(1)-release
[user@mitral user]$ a | b |cat
bash: a: command not found
bash: b: command not found
[user@mitral user]$ echo $?
0
[user@mitral bash-3.0]$ echo $BASH_VERSION
3.00.0(1)-release
[user@mitral bash-3.0]$ set -o pipefail
[user@mitral bash-3.0]$ a | b |cat
bash: a: command not found
bash: b: command not found
[user@mitral bash-3.0]$ echo $?
127
Feel the love!
timestamped history sounds like a useful auditing feature....
...Bush 3.0. I was wondering why the last two incarnations of your US president were so god-awful. ;)
Bad example. Using KDE, I click on my home directory icon, select the images I want to convert, right-click on one of them and pick Actions | Convert To | PNG.
This is just as quick, doesn't require you to memorise complicated syntax, and doesn't require filenames that follow a common pattern.
No, bash 3.0 is not compliant with RFC 2324.
Can't seems to find it from ftp://ftp.cwru.edu/pub/bash, ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/bash, nor from other mirrors.
The most updated version is still 2.05b, not even the patch to 3.0 is available...
My post started with +2 (cause I are 1337). Then I got an "Interesting", two "Overrated"s, a "Funny", and most recently a "Flamebait".
Come on, mods: can I have an "Insightful" and an "Underrated", too?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
The plan was to introduce new features in sub-versions like
As opposed to most open source software, which releases x.0 as soon as it compiles, and only then starts working out the stability bugs.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Why type when you can just point and click?
Because I type a lot faster than I mouse...
I amended the page for DotZshRc to point out that you really need to create both .zshrc and .zshenv from my site to get the full experience. Through this moment, over 200 people have visited the DotZshRc page, but only about 80 have seen DotZshEnv. If you're in the 120-user disjoint, then go back and snag the other one too!
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
But what if I want to do:You gonna write a custom GUI app for everything? The nice thing about the command line is that it's "language oriented" rather than "picture oriented." Rather than pointing at what I want and clicking, I tell the computer what I want using a language.
It's the same reason we don't code with a point & click interface (save for VB, but the point and click still only got you so far).
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
Ok, now do it every morning, at 3am, except on Sundays, and move corrupted images to the trashcan.
The point of a shell script is not to automate one-time generic tasks (that's what your context menu entry is for), but to automate one-time higly specific tasks (for which you can't reasonabily expect to have a predefined context menu entry) or unattended tasks that have to be executed many-times.
In the end, scripting everything is dumb, but requiring your presence to do the same task by hand over and over is dumber. You know the saying, "be quiet or I'll replace you with a very small shell script", there is a reason behind that.
It broke a script in 1 package, and was fixed in about 40minutes. What the hell are you talking about?
Please explain to me what precludes a GUI from offering an advanced search tool, in which you can open up a property info dialog for the results and do bulk permission/property changes for. (Hint: nothing stops this from happening.)
What you will end up with is a huge dialog with all kinds of checkboxes and text fields for the same things the command has. Making it more irritating and slower for the purpose of turning it into a shiny GUI, no thanks.
Even if you somehow make a magically really useful GUI widget that makes me enter all the necessary information in a completely natural and quick way and achieve perfection, I cannot believe you can do that automatically for every command ever. Which means there'll be a neat widget for some commands, and the command line for the rest.
That way lies hell. We have a perfectly good command line, thank you. If you want to make GUI frontends, perfectly fine, but don't expect us to use them.
I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
I know its hard to tell, even for people famaliar with rbash; but this is what passes for humor among unix geeks.
I think only a few would even try to argue that they are. Most shells aren only somewhat available on non *nix OSs & many aren't available ay all off of them. Bash is, at least, reasonably available on most OSs. It is also the de facto shell standard, being found on linux and most newer *nix variants.
Portable shell scripts are probably more impeded when they use tools that aren't part of the shell & which aren't on the target system.
If you want true script portability, it is probably better to use something like perl. If you are concerned with writing short, simple scripts, shell scripts are fine. But not even sh is commonly interperated, & bash is VERY common, so bash isn't really an inappropriate choice.
This would obviously be very useful in scripts where the success or failure of a command in the pipleine would not be as determinable as watching it on screen interactively.
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside a dog it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
You're speaking in half-truths.
The top catagory for this story is Announcements. It is also listed under the following catagories: GNU, Operating Systems, Unix, and lastly Linux.
http://mattwalsh.com/twiki/bin/view/Main/BashDire
The one 'hole' is that command completion is a bit weird for the first element of a directory...if you have a directory that starts with 'ls', and you type ls <TAB> it will complete with 'ls'. Still, I find it to be very useful.
Does it hurt to hear them lying? Was this the only world you had?
leave 3.0 alone! >:(
Just raise the taxes on crack.
What I would like to see Bash do is command completion a la 4DOS:
If I have a command
foo bar baz
in my history, and I type
foo<TAB>
It complete that with the most recent command starting with "foo", and if I type
foo<UP>
it will cycle through the commands in history that start with "foo".
www.eFax.com are spammers
Indeed, dtksh is nice.
Actually, I think dtksh is the latest version of the Korn Shell around. Anybody know a more recent version?
I especially like things such as
>all.txt
for ((i=1;i> all.txt
done
It still p*sses me off that such a simple thing can't be done with ksh. (the default shell on many HP-UX/AIX/etc boxes.)
Features like the for loop above are mentioned in O'Reilly's Korn Shell book, but are not present in the version that's mostly available.
0.02
Matt
News about the Kettle Open Source project: on my blog