Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:39:54 -0500 From: Mike Jeays <Mike.Jeays@rogers.com> To: Jeff Lewis <jlewis1957@netscape.net> Cc: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Shell Games Message-ID: <1104431994.1669.19.camel@chaucer> In-Reply-To: <49B5BEF2.7CCF22F4.0F75C5EC@netscape.net> References: <49B5BEF2.7CCF22F4.0F75C5EC@netscape.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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 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 > > > > __________________________________________________________________ > Switch to Netscape Internet Service. > As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register > > Netscape. Just the Net You Need. > > New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer > Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups. > Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp > _______________________________________________ > 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"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1104431994.1669.19.camel>