Not Bourne Again... Apple to replace Bash with ZSH as default shell on MacOS Catalina

[AlexGoesHigh]

OpenAL isn't the only thing going away on MacOS, starting with Catalina, MacOS default shell for new users will be ZSH. All users created before upgrading to Catalina will maintain Bash as the default but Apple is also recommending developers to change to ZSH even back on Mojave and earlier as a signal that it will eventually be deprecated, perhaps on Catalina successor since they are doing the change now to start the transition.

 

As for a reason as to why change, it could be that Apple has been stuck with version 3.2 of bash since at least 2007, the year this particular version was released. Newer versions of bash have been released as GPLv3, a license that Apple is avoiding completely everywhere.

 

Quote

Apple hasn’t explained exactly why it’s making this change, but bash isn’t exactly a modern shell as it’s implemented in macOS, and a switch to something less aging makes a lot more sense for the company. Apple is stuck using version 3.2 of bash that has been licensed under GPLv2, as newer versions are licensed under GPLv3. Apple has kept clear of using GPLv3 packages in macOS as the license is generally more restrictive to companies like Apple that sign their own code and it includes explicit patent grants, too.

Apple Sauce: https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/4/18651872/apple-macos-catalina-zsh-bash-shell-replacement-features

 

I guess Apple is still allergic to GPLv3, end users aren't going to notice much but developers must now update their scripts since that where Bash and ZSH differentiate the most.

[Chunchunmaru_]

That's actually an improvement regardless of the license

[The King of the Undead]

whats wrong with gplv3?

[Sauron]

4 hours ago, will1432 said:

whats wrong with gplv3?

Depends on who you ask. Linus Torvalds would tell you it's too lenient since it allows companies to ignore it as long as they're willing to pay a fine. Apple would probably tell you it's too restrictive since any modifications must be released under the same license. I stand with Torvalds on this one.

 

This is a good change, I've used ZSH for a while and it's great. I might even consider using MacOS... except it's absolutely proprietary

 

[The King of the Undead]

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

Depends on who you ask. Linus Torvalds would tell you it's too lenient since it allows companies to ignore it as long as they're willing to pay a fine. Apple would probably tell you it's too restrictive since any modifications must be released under the same license. I stand with Torvalds on this one.

 

This is a good change, I've used ZSH for a while and it's great. I might even consider using MacOS... except it's absolutely proprietary

Thanks that explainse that.

[Commodus]

2 hours ago, Sauron said:

Depends on who you ask. Linus Torvalds would tell you it's too lenient since it allows companies to ignore it as long as they're willing to pay a fine. Apple would probably tell you it's too restrictive since any modifications must be released under the same license. I stand with Torvalds on this one.

 

This is a good change, I've used ZSH for a while and it's great. I might even consider using MacOS... except it's absolutely proprietary

 

So in short, GPLv3 is problematic for most people.  I certainly wouldn't blame Apple when it doesn't want to open up macOS just so that it can offer the command prompt you've seen for years.

 

On a side note: I always get a kick out of the seeming obliviousness of Richard Stallman.  He thinks he's free, but he refuses to use so many proprietary things that he's really a slave. A Chinese iPhone user probably has more practical freedom than he does.

[Sauron]

1 minute ago, Commodus said:

So in short, GPLv3 is problematic for most people.  I certainly wouldn't blame Apple when it doesn't want to open up macOS just so that it can offer the command prompt you've seen for years.

But I would blame Apple for not being willing to open up in the first place.

1 minute ago, Commodus said:

On a side note: I always get a kick out of the seeming obliviousness of Richard Stallman.  He thinks he's free, but he refuses to use so many proprietary things that he's really a slave. A Chinese iPhone user probably has more practical freedom than he does.

There's a big difference in that Stallman does this out of personal choice and not in service to anyone else's interests, which makes him nothing like a slave - but there's more to it than that. Slavery is unacceptable even if the slave is ok with it, in the same way Stallman feels that even if using proprietary software is a personal choice you're still on the abused end of an abusive relationship with copyright law and corporatism. You may or may not agree but there is logic to his madness.

[Commodus]

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

But I would blame Apple for not being willing to open up in the first place.

I wouldn't.  The implication is that Apple would have to open source key parts of its OS beyond the kernel and its terminal, and basically commit hara kiri.  Would you argue that Microsoft has to completely open source Windows because there's a Linux kernel on the way?

 

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

There's a big difference in that Stallman does this out of personal choice and not in service to anyone else's interests, which makes him nothing like a slave - but there's more to it than that. Slavery is unacceptable even if the slave is ok with it, in the same way Stallman feels that even if using proprietary software is a personal choice you're still on the abused end of an abusive relationship with copyright law and corporatism. You may or may not agree but there is logic to his madness.

Like I said, it's about practical freedom.  Rigid ideology is a prison that not only makes you suffer, but frequently makes others suffer as well.  Look at religion as an example.  In Stallman's case, it prevents him from advocating for real, meaningful freedom.  If he'd been in Tunisia during the Arab Spring, he'd have been busy petitioning the regime to switch to Linux while remaining oblivious to the quest for actual freedom outside his door (since that would have required using proprietary services like Facebook).  Open source is useful in many cases, but being dogmatic about it leads to being defined by what you can't do.

[Chunchunmaru_]

1 hour ago, Commodus said:

On a side note: I always get a kick out of the seeming obliviousness of Richard Stallman.  He thinks he's free, but he refuses to use so many proprietary things that he's really a slave. A Chinese iPhone user probably has more practical freedom than he does.

Ironically he uses an iPhone

[Sauron]

53 minutes ago, Commodus said:

I wouldn't.  The implication is that Apple would have to open source key parts of its OS beyond the kernel and its terminal, and basically commit hara kiri.  Would you argue that Microsoft has to completely open source Windows because there's a Linux kernel on the way?

Open source and free software are not the same thing - and I do believe all software should be free software. I really don't care about how much more or less money Apple would make, I consider proprietary software unethical.

 

And yes, I think Microsoft SHOULD make Windows free software regardless of whether it includes Linux or not (which by the way doesn't force them to change the Windows license - it just forces them to release any changes they make to Linux itself under the GPLv2). I don't expect them to but I firmly believe it's unethical for them not to do that.

57 minutes ago, Commodus said:

Like I said, it's about practical freedom.  Rigid ideology is a prison that not only makes you suffer, but frequently makes others suffer as well.  Look at religion as an example.

Firmness in ideology doesn't automatically imply no flexibility in practice. I think proprietary software is unethical but I won't chastise someone for going down that path when they try to enter the shark tank that is the current software market. Things like this require a systematic change to truly take hold, no individual can be blamed for that. As for religion, I believe the empathic aspect of Christianity is too often overlooked by Christians.

[duncannah]

ZSH is lit (especially with OMZ) -- already switched to it long ago. Great idea to replace bash with it 

[williamcll]

Well everyone tells me that Bash is bad so I think this is a good choice.

[mrchow19910319]

zsh is the shit..

[Guest]

Catalina gives you an option when you use terminal and reminds you every time to switch when you open up (if not). 

IDK no difference when I switched, but I only use basic commands like editing the host file and dd.