I was talking to a friend about how to add a directory to your PATH today. It’s something that feels “obvious” to me since I’ve been using the terminal for a long time, but when I searched for instructions for how to do it, I actually couldn’t find something that explained all of the steps – a lot of them just said “add this to ~/.bashrc”, but what if you’re not using bash? What if your bash config is actually in a different file? And how are you supposed to figure out which directory to add anyway? So I wanted to try to write down some more complete directions and mention some of the gotchas I’ve run into over the years. Here’s a table of contents: step 1: what shell are you using? step 2: find your shell’s config file a note on bash’s config file step 3: figure out which directory to add step 3.1: double check it’s the right directory step 4: edit your shell config step 5: restart your shell problems: problem 1: it ran the wrong program problem 2: the program isn’t being run from your shell notes: a note on source a note on fish_add_path step 1: what shell are you using? If you’re not sure what shell you’re using, here’s a way to find out. Run this: ps -p $$ -o pid,comm= if you’re using bash, it’ll print out 97295 bash if you’re using zsh, it’ll print out 97295 zsh if you’re using fish, it’ll print out an error like “In fish, please use $fish_pid” ($$ isn’t valid syntax in fish, but in any case the error message tells you that you’re using fish, which you probably already knew) Also bash is the default on Linux and zsh is the default on Mac OS (as of 2024). I’ll only cover bash, zsh, and fish in these directions. step 2: find your shell’s config file in zsh, it’s probably ~/.zshrc in bash, it might be ~/.bashrc, but it’s complicated, see the note in the next section in fish, it’s probably ~/.config/fish/config.fish (you can run echo $__fish_config_dir if you want to be 100% sure) a note on bash’s config file Bash has three possible config files: ~/.bashrc, ~/.bash_profile, and ~/.profile. If you’re not sure which one your system is set up to use, I’d recommend testing this way: add echo hi there to your ~/.bashrc Restart your terminal If you see “hi there”, that means ~/.bashrc is being used! Hooray! Otherwise remove it and try the same thing with ~/.bash_profile You can also try ~/.profile if the first two options don’t work. (there are a lot of elaborate flow charts out there that explain how bash decides which config file to use but IMO it’s not worth it and just testing is the fastest way to be sure) step 3: figure out which directory to add Let’s say that you’re trying to install and run a program called http-server and it doesn’t work, like this: $ npm install -g http-server $ http-server bash: http-server: command not found How do you find what directory http-server is in? Honestly in general this is not that easy – often the answer is something like “it depends on how npm is configured”. A few ideas: Often when setting up a new installer (like cargo, npm, homebrew, etc), when you first set it up it’ll print out some directions about how to update your PATH. So if you’re paying attention you can get the directions then. Sometimes installers will automatically update your shell’s config file to update your PATH for you Sometimes just Googling “where does npm install things?” will turn up the answer Some tools have a subcommand that tells you where they’re configured to install things, like: Homebrew: brew --prefix (and then append /bin/ and /sbin/ to what that gives you) Node/npm: npm config get prefix (then append /bin/) Go: go env | grep GOPATH (then append /bin/) asdf: asdf info | grep ASDF_DIR (then append /bin/ and /shims/) step 3.1: double check it’s the right directory Once you’ve found a directory you think might be the right one, make sure it’s actually correct! For example, I found out that on my machine, http-server is in ~/.npm-global/bin. I can make sure that it’s the right directory by trying to run the program http-server in that directory like this: $ ~/.npm-global/bin/http-server Starting up http-server, serving ./public It worked! Now that you know what directory you need to add to your PATH, let’s move to the next step! step 4: edit your shell config Now we have the 2 critical pieces of information we need: Which directory you’re trying to add to your PATH (like ~/.npm-global/bin/) Where your shell’s config is (like ~/.bashrc, ~/.zshrc, or ~/.config/fish/config.fish) Now what you need to add depends on your shell: bash and zsh instructions: Open your shell’s config file, and add a line like this: export PATH=$PATH:~/.npm-global/bin/ (obviously replace ~/.npm-global/bin with the actual directory you’re trying to add) fish instructions: In fish, the syntax is different: set PATH $PATH ~/.npm-global/bin (in fish you can also use fish_add_path, some notes on that further down) step 5: restart your shell Now, an extremely important step: updating your shell’s config won’t take effect if you don’t restart it! Two ways to do this: open a new terminal (or terminal tab), and maybe close the old one so you don’t get confused Run bash to start a new shell (or zsh if you’re using zsh, or fish if you’re using fish) I’ve found that both of these usually work fine. And you should be done! Try running the program you were trying to run and hopefully it works now. If not, here are a couple of problems that you might run into: problem 1: it ran the wrong program If the wrong version of a is program running, you might need to add the directory to the beginning of your PATH instead of the end. For example, on my system I have two versions of python3 installed, which I can see by running which -a: $ which -a python3 /usr/bin/python3 /opt/homebrew/bin/python3 The one your shell will use is the first one listed. If you want to use the Homebrew version, you need to add that directory (/opt/homebrew/bin) to the beginning of your PATH instead, by putting this in your shell’s config file (it’s /opt/homebrew/bin/:$PATH instead of the usual $PATH:/opt/homebrew/bin/) export PATH=/opt/homebrew/bin/:$PATH or in fish: set PATH ~/.cargo/bin $PATH problem 2: the program isn’t being run from your shell All of these directions only work if you’re running the program from your shell. If you’re running the program from an IDE, from a GUI, in a cron job, or some other way, you’ll need to add the directory to your PATH in a different way, and the exact details might depend on the situation. in a cron job Some options: use the full path to the program you’re running, like /home/bork/bin/my-program put the full PATH you want as the first line of your crontab (something like PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:….). You can get the full PATH you’re using in your shell by running echo "PATH=$PATH". I’m honestly not sure how to handle it in an IDE/GUI because I haven’t run into that in a long time, will add directions here if someone points me in the right direction. a note on source When you install cargo (Rust’s installer) for the first time, it gives you these instructions for how to set up your PATH, which don’t mention a specific directory at all. This is usually done by running one of the following (note the leading DOT): . "$HOME/.cargo/env" # For sh/bash/zsh/ash/dash/pdksh source "$HOME/.cargo/env.fish" # For fish The idea is that you add that line to your shell’s config, and their script automatically sets up your PATH (and potentially other things) for you. This is pretty common (Homebrew and asdf have something similar), and there are two ways to approach this: Just do what the tool suggests (add . "$HOME/.cargo/env" to your shell’s config) Figure out which directories the script they’re telling you to run would add to your PATH, and then add those manually. Here’s how I’d do that: Run . "$HOME/.cargo/env" in my shell (or the fish version if using fish) Run echo "$PATH" | tr ':' '\n' | grep cargo to figure out which directories it added See that it says /Users/bork/.cargo/bin and shorten that to ~/.cargo/bin Add the directory ~/.cargo/bin to PATH (with the directions in this post) I don’t think there’s anything wrong with doing what the tool suggests (it might be the “best way”!), but personally I usually use the second approach because I prefer knowing exactly what configuration I’m changing. a note on fish_add_path fish has a handy function called fish_add_path that you can run to add a directory to your PATH like this: fish_add_path /some/directory This will add the directory to your PATH, and automatically update all running fish shells with the new PATH. You don’t have to update your config at all! This is EXTREMELY convenient, but one downside (and the reason I’ve personally stopped using it) is that if you ever need to remove the directory from your PATH a few weeks or months later because maybe you made a mistake, it’s kind of hard to do (there are instructions in this comments of this github issue though). that’s all Hopefully this will help some people. Let me know (on Mastodon or Bluesky) if you there are other major gotchas that have tripped you up when adding a directory to your PATH, or if you have questions about this post!

A few weeks ago I ran a terminal survey (you can read the results here) and at the end I asked: What’s the most frustrating thing about using the terminal for you? 1600 people answered, and I decided to spend a few days categorizing all the responses. Along the way I learned that classifying qualitative data is not easy but I gave it my best shot. I ended up building a custom tool to make it faster to categorize everything. As with all of my surveys the methodology isn’t particularly scientific. I just posted the survey to Mastodon and Twitter, ran it for a couple of days, and got answers from whoever happened to see it and felt like responding. Here are the top categories of frustrations! I think it’s worth keeping in mind while reading these comments that 40% of people answering this survey have been using the terminal for 21+ years 95% of people answering the survey have been using the terminal for at least 4 years These comments aren’t coming from total beginners. Here are the categories of frustrations! The number in brackets is the number of people with that frustration. Honestly I don’t how how interesting this is to other people – I’m just writing this up for myself because I’m trying to write a zine about the terminal and I wanted to get a sense for what people are having trouble with. remembering syntax (115) People talked about struggles remembering: the syntax for CLI tools like awk, jq, sed, etc the syntax for redirects keyboard shortcuts for tmux, text editing, etc One example comment: There are just so many little “trivia” details to remember for full functionality. Even after all these years I’ll sometimes forget where it’s 2 or 1 for stderr, or forget which is which for > and >>. switching terminals is hard (91) People talked about struggling with switching systems (for example home/work computer or when SSHing) and running into: OS differences in keyboard shortcuts (like Linux vs Mac) systems which don’t have their preferred text editor (“no vim” or “only vim”) different versions of the same command (like Mac OS grep vs GNU grep) no tab completion a shell they aren’t used to (“the subtle differences between zsh and bash”) as well as differences inside the same system like pagers being not consistent with each other (git diff pagers, other pagers). One example comment: I got used to fish and vi mode which are not available when I ssh into servers, containers. color (85) Lots of problems with color, like: programs setting colors that are unreadable with a light background color finding a colorscheme they like (and getting it to work consistently across different apps) color not working inside several layers of SSH/tmux/etc not liking the defaults not wanting color at all and struggling to turn it off This comment felt relatable to me: Getting my terminal theme configured in a reasonable way between the terminal emulator and fish (I did this years ago and remember it being tedious and fiddly and now feel like I’m locked into my current theme because it works and I dread touching any of that configuration ever again). keyboard shortcuts (84) Half of the comments on keyboard shortcuts were about how on Linux/Windows, the keyboard shortcut to copy/paste in the terminal is different from in the rest of the OS. Some other issues with keyboard shortcuts other than copy/paste: using Ctrl-W in a browser-based terminal and closing the window the terminal only supports a limited set of keyboard shortcuts (no Ctrl-Shift-, no Super, no Hyper, lots of ctrl- shortcuts aren’t possible like Ctrl-,) the OS stopping you from using a terminal keyboard shortcut (like by default Mac OS uses Ctrl+left arrow for something else) issues using emacs in the terminal backspace not working (2) other copy and paste issues (75) Aside from “the keyboard shortcut for copy and paste is different”, there were a lot of OTHER issues with copy and paste, like: copying over SSH how tmux and the terminal emulator both do copy/paste in different ways dealing with many different clipboards (system clipboard, vim clipboard, the “middle click” keyboard on Linux, tmux’s clipboard, etc) and potentially synchronizing them random spaces added when copying from the terminal pasting multiline commands which automatically get run in a terrifying way wanting a way to copy text without using the mouse discoverability (55) There were lots of comments about this, which all came down to the same basic complaint – it’s hard to discover useful tools or features! This comment kind of summed it all up: How difficult it is to learn independently. Most of what I know is an assorted collection of stuff I’ve been told by random people over the years. steep learning curve (44) A lot of comments about it generally having a steep learning curve. A couple of example comments: After 15 years of using it, I’m not much faster than using it than I was 5 or maybe even 10 years ago. and That I know I could make my life easier by learning more about the shortcuts and commands and configuring the terminal but I don’t spend the time because it feels overwhelming. history (42) Some issues with shell history: history not being shared between terminal tabs (16) limits that are too short (4) history not being restored when terminal tabs are restored losing history because the terminal crashed not knowing how to search history One example comment: It wasted a lot of time until I figured it out and still annoys me that “history” on zsh has such a small buffer; I have to type “history 0” to get any useful length of history. bad documentation (37) People talked about: documentation being generally opaque lack of examples in man pages programs which don’t have man pages Here’s a representative comment: Finding good examples and docs. Man pages often not enough, have to wade through stack overflow scrollback (36) A few issues with scrollback: programs printing out too much data making you lose scrollback history resizing the terminal messes up the scrollback lack of timestamps GUI programs that you start in the background printing stuff out that gets in the way of other programs’ outputs One example comment: When resizing the terminal (in particular: making it narrower) leads to broken rewrapping of the scrollback content because the commands formatted their output based on the terminal window width. “it feels outdated” (33) Lots of comments about how the terminal feels hampered by legacy decisions and how users often end up needing to learn implementation details that feel very esoteric. One example comment: Most of the legacy cruft, it would be great to have a green field implementation of the CLI interface. shell scripting (32) Lots of complaints about POSIX shell scripting. There’s a general feeling that shell scripting is difficult but also that switching to a different less standard scripting language (fish, nushell, etc) brings its own problems. Shell scripting. My tolerance to ditch a shell script and go to a scripting language is pretty low. It’s just too messy and powerful. Screwing up can be costly so I don’t even bother. more issues Some more issues that were mentioned at least 10 times: (31) inconsistent command line arguments: is it -h or help or –help? (24) keeping dotfiles in sync across different systems (23) performance (e.g. “my shell takes too long to start”) (20) window management (potentially with some combination of tmux tabs, terminal tabs, and multiple terminal windows. Where did that shell session go?) (17) generally feeling scared/uneasy (“The debilitating fear that I’m going to do some mysterious Bad Thing with a command and I will have absolutely no idea how to fix or undo it or even really figure out what happened”) (16) terminfo issues (“Having to learn about terminfo if/when I try a new terminal emulator and ssh elsewhere.”) (16) lack of image support (sixel etc) (15) SSH issues (like having to start over when you lose the SSH connection) (15) various tmux/screen issues (for example lack of integration between tmux and the terminal emulator) (15) typos & slow typing (13) the terminal getting messed up for various reasons (pressing Ctrl-S, cating a binary, etc) that’s all! I’m not going to make a lot of commentary on these results, but here are a couple of categories that feel related to me: remembering syntax & history (often the thing you need to remember is something you’ve run before!) discoverability & the learning curve (the lack of discoverability is definitely a big part of what makes it hard to learn)

Hello! Recently I ran a terminal survey and I asked people what frustrated them. One person commented: There are so many pieces to having a modern terminal experience. I wish it all came out of the box. My immediate reaction was “oh, getting a modern terminal experience isn’t that hard, you just need to….”, but the more I thought about it, the longer the “you just need to…” list got, and I kept thinking about more and more caveats. So I thought I would write down some notes about what it means to me personally to have a “modern” terminal experience and what I think can make it hard for people to get there. what is a “modern terminal experience”? Here are a few things that are important to me, with which part of the system is responsible for them: multiline support for copy and paste: if you paste 3 commands in your shell, it should not immediatly run them all! That’s scary! (shell, terminal emulator) infinite shell history: if I run a command in my shell, it should be saved forever, not deleted after 500 history entries or whatever. Also I want commands to be saved to the history immediately when I run them, not only when I exit the shell session (shell) a useful prompt: I can’t live without having my current directory and current git branch in my prompt (shell) 24-bit colour: this is important to me because I find it MUCH easier to theme neovim with 24-bit colour support than in a terminal with only 256 colours (terminal emulator) clipboard integration between vim and my operating system so that when I copy in Firefox, I can just press p in vim to paste (text editor, maybe the OS/terminal emulator too) good autocomplete: for example commands like git should have command-specific autocomplete (shell) having colours in ls (shell config) a terminal theme I like: I spend a lot of time in my terminal, I want it to look nice and I want its theme to match my terminal editor’s theme. (terminal emulator, text editor) automatic terminal fixing: If a programs prints out some weird escape codes that mess up my terminal, I want that to automatically get reset so that my terminal doesn’t get messed up (shell) keybindings: I want Ctrl+left arrow to work (shell or application) being able to use the scroll wheel in programs like less: (terminal emulator and applications) There are a million other terminal conveniences out there and different people value different things, but those are the ones that I would be really unhappy without. how I achieve a “modern experience” My basic approach is: use the fish shell. Mostly don’t configure it, except to: set the EDITOR environment variable to my favourite terminal editor alias ls to ls --color=auto use any terminal emulator with 24-bit colour support. In the past I’ve used GNOME Terminal, Terminator, and iTerm, but I’m not picky about this. I don’t really configure it other than to choose a font. use neovim, with a configuration that I’ve been very slowly building over the last 9 years or so (the last time I deleted my vim config and started from scratch was 9 years ago) use the base16 framework to theme everything some “out of the box” options for a “modern” experience What if you want a nice experience, but don’t want to spend a lot of time on configuration? Figuring out how to configure vim in a way that I was satisfied with really did take me like ten years, which is a long time! My best ideas for how to get a reasonable terminal experience with minimal config are: shell: either fish or zsh with oh-my-zsh terminal emulator: almost anything with 24-bit colour support, for example all of these are popular: linux: GNOME Terminal, Konsole, Terminator, xfce4-terminal mac: iTerm (Terminal.app doesn’t have 256-colour support) cross-platform: kitty, alacritty, wezterm, or ghostty shell config: set the EDITOR environment variable to your favourite terminal text editor maybe alias ls to ls --color=auto text editor: this is a tough one, maybe micro or helix? I haven’t used either of them seriously but they both seem like very cool projects and I think it’s amazing that you can just use all the usual GUI editor commands (Ctrl-C to copy, Ctrl-V to paste, Ctrl-A to select all) in micro and they do what you’d expect. I would probably try switching to helix except that retraining my vim muscle memory seems way too hard and I have a working vim config already. Personally I wouldn’t use xterm, rxvt, or Terminal.app as a terminal emulator, because I’ve found in the past that they’re missing core features (like 24-bit colour in Terminal.app’s case) that make the terminal harder to use for me. I don’t want to pretend that getting a “modern” terminal experience is easier than it is though – I think there are two issues that make it hard. Let’s talk about them! issue 1 with getting to a “modern” experience: the shell bash and zsh are by far the two most popular shells, and neither of them provide a default experience that I would be happy using out of the box, for example: you need to customize your prompt they don’t come with git completions by default, you have to set them up by default, bash only stores 500 (!) lines of history and (at least on Mac OS) zsh is only configured to store 2000 lines, which is still not a lot I find bash’s tab completion very frustrating, if there’s more than one match then you can’t tab through them And even though I love fish, the fact that it isn’t POSIX does make it hard for a lot of folks to make the switch. Of course it’s totally possible to learn how to customize your prompt in bash or whatever, and it doesn’t even need to be that complicated (in bash I’d probably start with something like export PS1='[\u@\h \W$(__git_ps1 " (%s)")]\$ ', or maybe use starship). But each of these “not complicated” things really does add up and it’s especially tough if you need to keep your config in sync across several systems. An extremely popular solution to getting a “modern” shell experience is oh-my-zsh. It seems like a great project and I know a lot of people use it very happily, but I’ve struggled with configuration systems like that in the past – it looks like right now the base oh-my-zsh adds about 3000 lines of config, and often I find that having an extra configuration system makes it harder to debug what’s happening when things go wrong. I personally have a tendency to use the system to add a lot of extra plugins, make my system slow, get frustrated that it’s slow, and then delete it completely and write a new config from scratch. issue 2 with getting to a “modern” experience: the text editor In the terminal survey I ran recently, the most popular terminal text editors by far were vim, emacs, and nano. I think the main options for terminal text editors are: use vim or emacs and configure it to your liking, you can probably have any feature you want if you put in the work use nano and accept that you’re going to have a pretty limited experience (for example as far as I can tell if you want to copy some text from nano and put it in your system clipboard you just… can’t?) use micro or helix which seem to offer a pretty good out-of-the-box experience, potentially occasionally run into issues with using a less mainstream text editor just avoid using a terminal text editor as much as possible, maybe use VSCode, use VSCode’s terminal for all your terminal needs, and mostly never edit files in the terminal issue 3: individual applications The last issue is that sometimes individual programs that I use are kind of annoying. For example on my Mac OS machine, /usr/bin/sqlite3 doesn’t support the Ctrl+Left Arrow keyboard shortcut. Fixing this to get a reasonable terminal experience in SQLite was a little complicated, I had to: realize why this is happening (Mac OS won’t ship GNU tools, and “Ctrl-Left arrow” support comes from GNU readline) find a workaround (install sqlite from homebrew, which does have readline support) adjust my environment (put Homebrew’s sqlite3 in my PATH) I find that debugging application-specific issues like this is really not easy and often it doesn’t feel “worth it” – often I’ll end up just dealing with various minor inconveniences because I don’t want to spend hours investigating them. The only reason I was even able to figure this one out at all is that I’ve been spending a huge amount of time thinking about the terminal recently. A big part of having a “modern” experience using terminal programs is just using newer terminal programs, for example I can’t be bothered to learn a keyboard shortcut to sort the columns in top, but in htop I can just click on a column heading with my mouse to sort it. So I use htop instead! But discovering new more “modern” command line tools isn’t easy (though I made a list here), finding ones that I actually like using in practice takes time, and if you’re SSHed into another machine, they won’t always be there. everything affects everything else Something I find tricky about configuring my terminal to make everything “nice” is that changing one seemingly small thing about my workflow can really affect everything else. For example right now I don’t use tmux. But if I needed to use tmux again (for example because I was doing a lot of work SSHed into another machine), I’d need to think about a few things, like: if I wanted tmux’s copy to synchronize with my system clipboard over SSH, I’d need to make sure that my terminal emulator has OSC 52 support if I wanted to use iTerm’s tmux integration (which makes tmux tabs into iTerm tabs), I’d need to change how I configure colours – right now I set them with a shell script that I run when my shell starts, but that means the colours get lost when restoring a tmux session. and probably more things I haven’t thought of. “Using tmux means that I have to change how I manage my colours” sounds unlikely, but that really did happen to me and I decided “well, I don’t want to change how I manage colours right now, so I guess I’m not using that feature!”. It’s also hard to remember which features I’m relying on – for example maybe my current terminal does have OSC 52 support and because copying from tmux over SSH has always Just Worked I don’t even realize that that’s something I need, and then it mysteriously stops working when I switch terminals. change things slowly Personally even though I think my setup is not that complicated, it’s taken me 20 years to get to this point! Because terminal config changes are so likely to have unexpected and hard-to-understand consequences, I’ve found that if I change a lot of terminal configuration all at once it makes it much harder to understand what went wrong if there’s a problem, which can be really disorienting. So I prefer to make pretty small changes, and accept that changes can might take me a REALLY long time to get used to. For example I switched from using ls to eza a year or two ago and while I think I like it I’m still not quite sure about it. getting a “modern” terminal is not that easy Trying to explain how “easy” it is to configure your terminal really just made me think that it’s kind of hard and that I still sometimes get confused. I’ve found that there’s never one perfect way to configure things in the terminal that will be compatible with every single other thing. I just need to try stuff, figure out some kind of locally stable state that works for me, and accept that if I start using a new tool it might disrupt the system and I might need to rethink things.

Here’s a niche terminal problem that has bothered me for years but that I never really understood until a few weeks ago. Let’s say you’re running this command to watch for some specific output in a log file: tail -f /some/log/file | grep thing1 | grep thing2 If log lines are being added to the file relatively slowly, the result I’d see is… nothing! It doesn’t matter if there were matches in the log file or not, there just wouldn’t be any output. I internalized this as “uh, I guess pipes just get stuck sometimes and don’t show me the output, that’s weird”, and I’d handle it by just running grep thing1 /some/log/file | grep thing2 instead, which would work. So as I’ve been doing a terminal deep dive over the last few months I was really excited to finally learn exactly why this happens. why this happens: buffering The reason why “pipes get stuck” sometimes is that it’s VERY common for programs to buffer their output before writing it to a pipe or file. So the pipe is working fine, the problem is that the program never even wrote the data to the pipe! This is for performance reasons: writing all output immediately as soon as you can uses more system calls, so it’s more efficient to save up data until you have 8KB or so of data to write (or until the program exits) and THEN write it to the pipe. In this example: tail -f /some/log/file | grep thing1 | grep thing2 the problem is that grep thing1 is saving up all of its matches until it has 8KB of data to write, which might literally never happen. programs don’t buffer when writing to a terminal Part of why I found this so disorienting is that tail -f file | grep thing will work totally fine, but then when you add the second grep, it stops working!! The reason for this is that the way grep handles buffering depends on whether it’s writing to a terminal or not. Here’s how grep (and many other programs) decides to buffer its output: Check if stdout is a terminal or not using the isatty function If it’s a terminal, use line buffering (print every line immediately as soon as you have it) Otherwise, use “block buffering” – only print data if you have at least 8KB or so of data to print So if grep is writing directly to your terminal then you’ll see the line as soon as it’s printed, but if it’s writing to a pipe, you won’t. Of course the buffer size isn’t always 8KB for every program, it depends on the implementation. For grep the buffering is handled by libc, and libc’s buffer size is defined in the BUFSIZ variable. Here’s where that’s defined in glibc. (as an aside: “programs do not use 8KB output buffers when writing to a terminal” isn’t, like, a law of terminal physics, a program COULD use an 8KB buffer when writing output to a terminal if it wanted, it would just be extremely weird if it did that, I can’t think of any program that behaves that way) commands that buffer & commands that don’t One annoying thing about this buffering behaviour is that you kind of need to remember which commands buffer their output when writing to a pipe. Some commands that don’t buffer their output: tail cat tee I think almost everything else will buffer output, especially if it’s a command where you’re likely to be using it for batch processing. Here’s a list of some common commands that buffer their output when writing to a pipe, along with the flag that disables block buffering. grep (--line-buffered) sed (-u) awk (there’s a fflush() function) tcpdump (-l) jq (-u) tr (-u) cut (can’t disable buffering) Those are all the ones I can think of, lots of unix commands (like sort) may or may not buffer their output but it doesn’t matter because sort can’t do anything until it finishes receiving input anyway. programming languages where the default “print” statement buffers Also, here are a few programming language where the default print statement will buffer output when writing to a pipe, and some ways to disable buffering if you want: C (disable with setvbuf) Python (disable with python -u, or PYTHON_UNBUFFERED=1, or sys.stdout.reconfigure(line_buffering=False), or print(x, flush=True)) Ruby (disable with STDOUT.sync = true) Perl (disable with $| = 1) I assume that these languages are designed this way so that the default print function will be fast when you’re doing batch processing. Also whether output is buffered or not might depend on what print function you use, for example in Rust print! buffers when writing to a pipe but println! will flush its output. when you press Ctrl-C on a pipe, the contents of the buffer are lost Let’s say you’re running this command as a hacky way to watch for DNS requests to example.com, and you forgot to pass -l to tcpdump: sudo tcpdump -ni any port 53 | grep example.com When you press Ctrl-C, what happens? In a magical perfect world, what I would want to happen is for tcpdump to flush its buffer, grep would search for example.com, and I would see all the output I missed. But in the real world, what happens is that all the programs get killed and the output in tcpdump’s buffer is lost. I think this problem is probably unavoidable – I spent a little time with strace to see how this works and grep receives the SIGINT before tcpdump anyway so even if tcpdump tried to flush its buffer grep would already be dead. redirecting to a file also buffers It’s not just pipes, this will also buffer: sudo tcpdump -ni any port 53 > output.txt Redirecting to a file doesn’t have the same “Ctrl-C will totally destroy the contents of the buffer” problem though – in my experience it usually behaves more like you’d want, where the contents of the buffer get written to the file before the program exits. I’m not 100% sure whether this is something you can always rely on or not. a bunch of potential ways to avoid buffering Okay, let’s talk solutions. Let’s say you’ve run this command or s tail -f /some/log/file | grep thing1 | grep thing2 I asked people on Mastodon how they would solve this in practice and there were 5 basic approaches. Here they are: solution 1: run a program that finishes quickly Historically my solution to this has been to just avoid the “command writing to pipe slowly” situation completely and instead run a program that will finish quickly like this: cat /some/log/file | grep thing1 | grep thing2 | tail This doesn’t do the same thing as the original command but it does mean that you get to avoid thinking about these weird buffering issues. (you could also do grep thing1 /some/log/file but I often prefer to use an “unnecessary” cat) solution 2: remember the “line buffer” flag to grep You could remember that grep has a flag to avoid buffering and pass it like this: tail -f /some/log/file | grep --line-buffered thing1 | grep thing2 solution 3: use awk Some people said that if they’re specifically dealing with a multiple greps situation, they’ll rewrite it to use a single awk instead, like this: tail -f /some/log/file | awk '/thing1/ && /thing2/' Or you would write a more complicated grep, like this: tail -f /some/log/file | grep -E 'thing1.*thing2' (awk also buffers, so for this to work you’ll want awk to be the last command in the pipeline) solution 4: use stdbuf stdbuf uses LD_PRELOAD to turn off libc’s buffering, and you can use it to turn off output buffering like this: tail -f /some/log/file | stdbuf -o0 grep thing1 | grep thing2 Like any LD_PRELOAD solution it’s a bit unreliable – it doesn’t work on static binaries, I think won’t work if the program isn’t using libc’s buffering, and doesn’t always work on Mac OS. Harry Marr has a really nice How stdbuf works post. solution 5: use unbuffer unbuffer program will force the program’s output to be a TTY, which means that it’ll behave the way it normally would on a TTY (less buffering, colour output, etc). You could use it in this example like this: tail -f /some/log/file | unbuffer grep thing1 | grep thing2 Unlike stdbuf it will always work, though it might have unwanted side effects, for example grep thing1’s will also colour matches. If you want to install unbuffer, it’s in the expect package. that’s all the solutions I know about! It’s a bit hard for me to say which one is “best”, I think personally I’m mostly likely to use unbuffer because I know it’s always going to work. If I learn about more solutions I’ll try to add them to this post. I’m not really sure how often this comes up I think it’s not very common for me to have a program that slowly trickles data into a pipe like this, normally if I’m using a pipe a bunch of data gets written very quickly, processed by everything in the pipeline, and then everything exits. The only examples I can come up with right now are: tcpdump tail -f watching log files in a different way like with kubectl logs the output of a slow computation what if there were an environment variable to disable buffering? I think it would be cool if there were a standard environment variable to turn off buffering, like PYTHON_UNBUFFERED in Python. I got this idea from a couple of blog posts by Mark Dominus in 2018. Maybe NO_BUFFER like NO_COLOR? The design seems tricky to get right; Mark points out that NETBSD has environment variables called STDBUF, STDBUF1, etc which gives you a ton of control over buffering but I imagine most developers don’t want to implement many different environment variables to handle a relatively minor edge case. stuff I left out Some things I didn’t talk about in this post since these posts have been getting pretty long recently and seriously does anyone REALLY want to read 3000 words about buffering? the difference between line buffering and having totally unbuffered output how buffering to stderr is different from buffering to stdout this post is only about buffering that happens inside the program, your operating system’s TTY driver also does a little bit of buffering sometimes other reasons you might need to flush your output other than “you’re writing to a pipe”