You might want to consider replacing sh with bash if you want to actually do BASH scripting. They are different interpreters, and one can lead to vastly different set of available features depending on platform you run it on, while the other will (correctly) crash if the missing features (namely BASH) is missing on the system.
Lead Developer: Adobe Experience Manager.
Father of one.
Minnesota.
Occasionally write here: ahmedmusallam.com and there: https://blogs.perficientdigital.com/author/amusallam/
I started this post to talk about shell scripting in general. but I think I think you’re right, its confusing that way. I’ll change the shebang to be bash exclusive. Thank you for the feedback!
Both are definitely valid options, just if you want to write for bash then it's better to avoid ambiguity about it. When writing with support for BSD, Busybox, etc. environments in mind (e.g. inside Alpine Linux), sh is the better option, just comes with some extra baggage.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
#!/usr/bin/env shYou might want to consider replacing
shwithbashif you want to actually do BASH scripting. They are different interpreters, and one can lead to vastly different set of available features depending on platform you run it on, while the other will (correctly) crash if the missing features (namely BASH) is missing on the system.I started this post to talk about shell scripting in general. but I think I think you’re right, its confusing that way. I’ll change the shebang to be bash exclusive. Thank you for the feedback!
Both are definitely valid options, just if you want to write for bash then it's better to avoid ambiguity about it. When writing with support for BSD, Busybox, etc. environments in mind (e.g. inside Alpine Linux),
shis the better option, just comes with some extra baggage.