Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 6 Jun 2010 10:50:43 -0700
From:      Chip Camden <sterling@camdensoftware.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: which is the basic differences between the shells?
Message-ID:  <20100606175043.GA46089@libertas.local.camdensoftware.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100606163136.GA27788@guilt.hydra>
References:  <AANLkTinG745GjOaZKLT1TfKgqVi6VHt9-ciHWQUY57VT@mail.gmail.com> <20100605231715.GD69990@libertas.local.camdensoftware.com> <20100606163136.GA27788@guilt.hydra>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jun 06 2010 10:31, Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 04:17:15PM -0700, Chip Camden wrote:
> > 
> > I like zsh, because it's sh-compatible, brings in a lot of the good ideas
> > from csh/tcsh, and the license appears to be copyfree rather than copyleft.
> 
> Do you use that as your interactive shell, for scripting, or both?
> 

Interactive only.  For scripting, I stick to sh unless it gets too complex --
then I jump to Ruby.
> 
> > 
> > man zsh to see that there are so many features they had to break up the
> > man pages.
> 
> That's kind of scary.

True, and it shows in its initial virtual size:

sterling   62630  0.0  0.0  8264  1804   0  I    10:42AM   0:00.00 sh
sterling   62733  0.0  0.1 10284  2932   0  I    10:42AM   0:00.01 csh
sterling   62791  0.0  0.1 10284  2848   0  I    10:43AM   0:00.01 tcsh
sterling   70731  0.0  0.1 14580  4324   0  I    10:46AM   0:00.05 zsh
sterling   71773  0.0  0.1 10220  2908   0  I+   10:46AM   0:00.01 bash

But on a laptop with 4GB, I don't miss it.

-- 
Sterling (Chip) Camden | camdensoftware.com | chipstips.com | chipsquips.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100606175043.GA46089>