Here's a list of some Bash tutorials.
The primary purpose of that list is to lead beginners to good tutorials and not to the wrong ones. However, the secondary purpose is to provide information to increase quality of the linked tutorials.
My experience shows that nobody is interested when you "just send a mail to the author", even if he links a big "contact me" in his article(s). This is another try of influencing the Bash world.
This is a test for the data plugin. For now, please use the next section.
Note that these recommendations are my personal opinion. Please contact me
The recommendation-indicator "REC" used below is a number between 1 and 10 visualized as a bar:
Name (Links to review below)j | Weblink | REC indicator | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Bash guide on Greg's wiki | click (new revision draft) | This guide teaches modern stuff and good practises. I recommend learning from it. It was written by the guys in #bash IRC channel on Freenode (mainly lhunath ), because there are so many bad tutorials out there. |
|
Steve Parker's shell scripting guide | click | Very good (not only Bash) shell scripting guide. Teaches good practices, gives background information. | |
Bash Guide for Beginners (review) | click | Good introduction that really requires no previous knowledge, also covers the most important unix utilities | |
Advanced Bash Scripting Guide (ABS) (review) | click | Has a lot of information that is hard to find, is outdated and often unsafe. To be avoided until you can filter out the good stuff. | |
IBM developerWorks "Bash by example" | click(1) click(2) click(3) | Doesn't teach outdated stuff, doesn't tell you wrong things. A good start, though not that detailed. | |
Deadman's | click | Focus isn't scripting per se. Focus is interactive use and increasing the productivity on the prompt. Teaches some nice features. | |
Bash Shell Programming in Linux (P. Lutus) | click | Good start. Though there are small bugs. | |
BASH Help at hypexr.org (review) | click | Shows you some nice stuff and links to other ressources. Not a tutorial to learn Bash, though. | |
Bash Programming Introduction HowTo (TLDP) (review) | click | Absolute crap. Many syntax errors alone. | |
Quick guide (review) | click | Usable as a start. Doesn't teach wrong stuff, shows you good practices. | |
LinuxCommand.org: Writing shell scripts. (review) incomplete, thus ranking isn't complete | click | Practise oriented, some mistakes/flaws, but sadly it stops in the middle | |
Linux Shell Scripting Tutorial v2.0 (review) | click | currently reviewing (the tutorial is also under development) | |
linuxconfig.org Bash Scripting Tutorial (review) | click | Teaches many outdated, unstable, undetailed stuff. You won't learn scripting from there. | |
Beginner Linux Tutorial | click | A comprehensive introduction to the Linux Command Line including ample examples to make learning easy. | |
Beginner Bash Scripting Tutorial | click | A beginners guide to Bash scripting under Linux. | |
Linuxcommand.org: The Linux Command Line | click | A beginners guide to using Bash shell, basic unix utilities, and shell scripting. Shell scripting part is not so good. But good introduction on how to use various utilities in Bash. |
Article link: http://www.linuxconfig.org/Bash_scripting_Tutorial
Discussion link: http://www.linuxconfig.org/Talk:Bash_scripting_Tutorial UPDATE: Discussion page is gone.
Though the basic idea is nice, using flash terminal sessions and screenshots, there are many bugs or bad constructs.
Some stuff I didn't like there:
which
instead of builtin type -p
to determinate the location of a programfunction SOMENAME
keyword instead of the common POSIX-compatible variant SOMENAME()
to define a function$( … )
for command substitution$@
already is array-likeif/else
stuff looks as if the test
(or [ …]
) command is the only thing Bash can execute and checkfor
loop example that will explode on word-splittingtest
, not modern arithmetic componentsgrep -r hda6 * . 1>&2 stderr.txt
twkm
commented some things on their http://www.linuxconfig.org/Talk:Bash_scripting_Tutorial, I linked this article there. UPDATE: Discussion page is gone.
Overall, if the author doesn't change the article, it's unusable from my point of view. At least unusable to teach sane Bash scripting.
UPDATE: Discussion is available directly below the article. I linked this page, but waiting for moderator approval.
Article link: http://www.panix.com/~elflord/unix/bash-tute.html
Discussion Link: not available
This article is usable as basic introduction into the Bash world. It doesn't teach you wrong things, and it uses correct syntax and explanations nearly everywhere. However, it's not usable as complete learning tutorial - but that is not the goal.
One point (I have to criticize something ):
2.05b
) Bash version)
Article link: http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Bash-Prog-Intro-HOWTO.html
Discussion link: not available; EMail: mikkey (AT) dynamo.com.ar
A few points:
if [expression];
", which is wrong)seq(1)
+I like the style this article is written in. If the points are fixed, it could be a really usable starting point for newbies. But at the moment it's unusable
Article link: http://www.hypexr.org/bash_tutorial.php
Discussion link: not available; EMail: scott (AT) hypexr.org
The article is usable to step into the shell world. It's not a tutorial per se, it will tell you some nice CLI-specific things like readline or completion.
Only one point:
Article link: http://tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/
Discussion link: not available; EMail: thegrendel (AT) theriver.com
The only big problem I see with the ABS is, that the name doesn't match the reality. It doesn't teach advanced techniques. That doesn't mean the guide isn't good! It's one of the biggest, most complete and interesting Bash guides I've seen.
I don't want to write every point here that disturbs me. In general it's not that important since the mistakes or wrong assumptions it makes are minimal. Also I noticed that mistakes in example scripts vanish with time, the author polishes his work. Thanks Mr. Cooper.
The ABS is definitely worth reading to step deeper into the Bash commandline world of Linux (since many Linux-specific examples are there, they're unusable for Unices).
Article link: http://tldp.org/LDP/Bash-Beginners-Guide/html/
Discussion link: not available
Good introduction to bash and shell scripting, the guide is fairly complete and requires almost no previous knowledge other than be able to type some commands in a shell.
Some advice is a bit strange or outdated "Real Programmers - Most programmers will prefer to use the test built-in command" "Wherever possible, Bash users should try to use the syntax with angular brackets:($[ ])" but all in all a nice tutorial to get a good overview of shell programming starting from 0.
Article link: http://bash.cyberciti.biz/guide/Main_Page
Discussion link: use the individual MediaWiki discussion pages
Additional problem: The author rates his shell skills as "9 of 10" in his CV. After reading this tutorial personally I'd rate him 3/10
This guide has some big problems. It seems to cover a lot of material but has some pretty nasty issues, too. Examples:
$var
and echo ${var}
mostly without quoting.Conclusion
Beside all the bashing (sorry!) above: I think the problem is the following, the author did a lot using the shell, and he knows many things. But he doesn't know and/or understand the underlying concepts of most of the material covered. This - in my personal opinion - disqualifies him as the author of a guide/tutorial for shell scripting.
But
The tutorial is under development. It improves here and there. But the code style and robustness problems still remain.
UPDATE: Over time, the author fixed a lot of things and created new chapters. From time to time, I'll visit again and re-check it.
Article link: http://linuxcommand.org/writing_shell_scripts.php
Discussion link: not available
Bad:
.bash_profile
and .bashrc
is wrong ("Though placing your aliases and shell functions in your .bash_profile will work, it is not considered good form.")which
command, which might be popular here and there, but should not be used for various reasonsUPPERCASE
names are constants, this might be a good style, but it's not a programming feature. Real "constants" are made from read-only variablesecho
command that interprets them! On the other hand, it misses the quoting style that makes the shell interpret ANSI C escape sequences.function
keyword to define a function, which is correct, but bad style and unportablegetopts
for positional parameters, at least as an "advanced example"$@
) unquoted, and thus unsafe or buggySIGKILL
and the process stop signal can't be trapped. But that shouldn't really matter for daily shell codingmktemp
or the likeGood:
test
command in a nice, understandable wayexpr
or let
for arithmetic, good