fisher VS fish-shell

You've got to install Fisher, then get z, sponge and a few others from the awsm.fish list.

Then you get trapped by the utility and struggle when you land on some remote server's bash shell.

https://github.com/jorgebucaran/fisher

https://github.com/jorgebucaran/awsm.fish#readme

If you're running a script, you can use edc/bass to run it from a fish shell. Fisher is one of the first things I install after fish, then bass, z and a few other helper plugins.

https://github.com/edc/bass

https://github.com/jorgebucaran/fisher

As a minimalist plugin manager for Fish, I recommend fisher. I've created a plugin that can be installed via fisher and integrated into any Fish environment. If there are any reasons why you don't want to use Fisher, you can just copy-paste conf.d/autoenv.fish file to your ~/.config/fish/conf.d directory.

Fish is a acronyn for friendly interactive shell. It is a smart and user friendly shell for Unix-like operating systems like Linux. There are a lot of features that make it stand out from other shells like bash. It has a lot of features like autosuggestions, syntax highlighting, tab completions and a lot more. You can read more about it in the documentation. I have been using it for a while now and I it configured to my liking. In terms of plugins I use fisher to manage my plugins. I have a couple of plugins that I use on a daily basis. I have listed them below:

stay away from Oh-My-Fish - you probably don’t need it - Fish is pretty awesome out of the box, and if you do want a plugin or two Fisher is a much better route.

Agreed. I personally like Fisher (https://github.com/jorgebucaran/fisher) with this theme based on Powerlevel10k (https://github.com/IlanCosman/tide)

Fisher is a simple and convenient plugin manager for Fish. With a single command, you can install new plugins, update them, or remove them, without ever having to change any file. Convenient! Therefore, I recommend to install it to simplify your plugin management.

You can install it quickly using fisher:

I use https://github.com/jorgebucaran/fisher

Reminds of the note at the bottom of Fish's releases. It's there because the build system cannot determine the current version for some reason. Hopefully that will go away now that they have switched to a different language / build system. The custom tarball is used by Arch Linux at the very least.

https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/releases/tag/3.7.1

https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/issues/7772#issueco...

https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/fi...

A recent practical example of the former: the fish shell re-wrote incrementally from C++ to Rust, and is almost finished https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/discussions/10123

An example of the latter: c2rust, which is a work in progress but is very impressive https://github.com/immunant/c2rust

It currently translates into unsafe Rust, but the strategy is to separate the "compile C to unsafe Rust" steps and the "compile unsafe Rust to safe Rust" steps. As I see it, as it makes the overall task simpler, allows for more user freedom, and makes the latter potentially useful even for non-transpiled code. https://immunant.com/blog/2023/03/lifting/

And this discussion from November has an update on the progress: https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/discussions/10123

We're using bash as our terminal shell for now (it is standard in many distros) but it is not the only one out there. If you want to test out zsh, fish or oh-my-zsh, you will see that there are a few differences and the features are usually the main differentiator. Try that, poke around.

They have a variety of reasons to move to rust, as outlined in their original rust discussion[1]. Mostly around finding other contributors, and adding an async/parallel mode they're comfortable with.

[1] https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/pull/9512