Recently I got really interested in debloating and hardening my operating systems, cause I’m heavily inspired by Unix and “worse is better” philosophy. As I heard bash is heavy and we have much more lightweight and faster alternatives like these mentioned in title. They must be great alternative for scripting and interpreting but is there any reason to use them on my machines as interactive shell? Anyone are using them? Also is it worth to learn them as bash is standard IT industry?

  • pastermil@sh.itjust.works
    2·
    17 hours ago

    Can I entertain you with some minimalistic distros? Alpine is the first thing that comes to mind.

    It uses busybox which is some kind of minimalistic all-in-one program that includes everything you need to run an OS such as init system and core utilities. And yes, you guessed it, it includes a shell that is a stripped down version of bash. Even the libc is stripped down here, with musl instead of glibc.

    Speaking of busybox and musl, there’s also another distro that centers around compiling tiny embedded rootfs image. With this you can configure what (not) to include in the kernel. You can also do the same with busybox, where you can choose to include or exclude utilities.

    But honestly, to have something lean while being able to keep up with modern computing, I’d choose Gentoo where you can choose what (not) to put in your programs at compile time.

    • mlody@lemmy.worldOP
      1·
      17 hours ago

      I had contact with Alpine on one server. It’s great OS but I don’t think it’s great choice not for desktop. I’m using Gentoo and it gives me much more capabilities ;) Gentoo can’t work with busybox as GNU coreutils are hard dependency. musl is supported by Gentoo but as I heard there’s a lot of issues with it