Most Scalable Scripting Shell

[Michael42]

Hello,

Though these days most UNIX systems will run Bourne to BASH shell scripts I wanted to identify the top two most scalable shells. The goal of course is that if a script is written it run on as many UNIX platforms as possible without change.

My guess is that Bourne and C Shell are the most scalable.

Please, what is your input on this?

Thanks,

Michael42

 

[PHV]

For me, the best compromise is ksh (aka Posix-shell)

Hope This Helps, PH.
Want to get great answers to your Tek-Tips questions? Have a look at FAQ219-2884 or FAQ181-2886

 

[SamBones]

I think you mean "most portable", not "most scalable".

Many, many years ago I would have answered Bourne shell.

Many years ago I would have said BASH (but you may have to install it where you need it).

Now, I don't think it matters. Most modern *nixes come with a nice selection of shells. And if it's not there by default, it's usually available to be installed.

Still, the Bourne shell does seem to be a common denominator that's always there.

But, the Korn shell is my current favorite and is a standard where I work.

Hope this helps.

 

[LKBrwnDBA]

BASH is a step backwards from KSH

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The person who says it can't be done should not interrupt the person doing it. -- Chinese proverb

 

[Mag0007]

ksh all the way

 

[Annihilannic]

Another vote for for Ksh.

Annihilannic.

 

[feherke]

Hi

Nice to read this forum. This is the place where I read abit more about [tt]ksh[/tt] then it's name.

In our office all the administration work is done by [tt]bash[/tt] scripts and we are happy with them.

Feherke.

http://rootshell.be/~feherke/

 

[KenCunningham]

ksh for me too, but have run into problems (with Solaris) when it's defined as the default shell and /usr isn't available.

 

[Michael42]

Thanks all for your feedback.

It is really useful to know what others are using and why.

-Michael4

 

[coffeysm]

I usually stick with Bourne Shell, we are strictly a Sun shop where I work at. Like Ken mentions if you specify a different shell and /usr is not available, your system will not work. I wish they provided an unlinked version of the shells like they do with /sbin/sh....

 

[TrojanWarBlade]

My vote is for PERL! ;-)



Trojan.

 

[PHV]

My vote is for PERL
Have you tried to use PERL as login shell ?

 

[Trevoke]

* app-shells/zsh
Available versions: 4.0.9-r4 4.2.4 4.2.5
Installed: 4.2.5
Homepage:

http://www.zsh.org/

Description: UNIX Shell similar to the Korn shell

KSH is a step backwards from ZSH.. I still prefer BASH though

-Haben sie fosforos?
-No tiengo caballero, but I have un briquet.

 

[Michael42]

>> Have you tried to use PERL as login shell ?

I did not know you could use it as a login shell.

Sounds cool.

 

[PHV]

I did not know you could use it as a login shell
ANY program may be used as login shell (7th field of the /etc/passwd file)

Hope This Helps, PH.
Want to get great answers to your Tek-Tips questions? Have a look at FAQ219-2884 or FAQ181-2886

 

[p5wizard]

ANY program may be used as login shell (7th field of the /etc/passwd file)

In AIX, a user's login shell needs to be one of the shells listed in the usw stanza in /etc/security/login.cfg. Other UNIXes may have a similar requirement.


HTH,

p5wizard

 

[SamBones]

In AIX, a user's login shell needs to be one of the shells listed in the usw stanza in /etc/security/login.cfg. Other UNIXes may have a similar requirement.

In Solaris, the shell needs to be listed in [tt]/etc/shells[/tt] if that file exists. It can be anything, but it needs to be listed there if the file exists.

Hope this helps.