I've been trying to wrap my head around the differences between `.bash_profile` and `.bashrc`. As far as I understand, `.bash_profile` is used when you start an interactive login shell, and `.bashrc` is for an interactive non-login shell. Since non-login shells usually originate from a login shell, I wonder how `.bashrc` remains relevant if all configurations are inherited from `.bash_profile`. What's the real use case for `.bashrc`?
4 Answers
The reason for having both files comes down to efficiency. Putting everything in `.bash_profile` would mean re-running the same setups for every new terminal session, which can slow things down. That’s where `.bashrc` steps in - it allows you to load only the necessary configurations for non-login shells, keeping things snappy. Plus, `.bash_profile` is often used for setting environment variables, especially useful when logging in remotely.
Remember, you can start a new non-login shell independently of a login shell, which gives you more flexibility. That’s another reason to have `.bashrc` around!
Think of `.bash_profile` as the global setup for your environment while `.bashrc` handles instance-specific needs. For example, I have useful commands and custom aliases in my `.bashrc`, like an update alias to keep my system current with a simple command. This way, I don’t have to remember complex update commands each time!
I break it down like this: use `.bashrc` for settings that all sorts of processes might need, like proxy settings and paths. Reserve `.bash_profile` for things that are only for interactive shells, like aliases and SSH agent info. There are no strict rules here, though; tailor it to what works for you!
But if new shells inherit from `.bash_profile`, isn’t that a bit redundant? What specific scenarios are best suited for `.bashrc`?