<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Shelljs on Pi Stack</title>
    <link>https://www.pistack.xyz/tags/shelljs/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Shelljs on Pi Stack</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://www.pistack.xyz/tags/shelljs/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Node.js Shell Scripting in 2026: zx vs ShellJS vs execa — Which Should You Script With?</title>
      <link>https://www.pistack.xyz/posts/2026-08-17-nodejs-shell-scripting-zx-shelljs-execa-comparison/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.pistack.xyz/posts/2026-08-17-nodejs-shell-scripting-zx-shelljs-execa-comparison/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Bash scripts have a well-earned reputation: they are the fastest way to write a deploy script and the slowest way to debug one. Conditionals, quoting, arrays, and error handling all fight you past the tenth line. That is why a generation of developers moved scripting into Node.js — and why Google&amp;rsquo;s zx now sits at &lt;strong&gt;45,668 GitHub stars&lt;/strong&gt;, the most-starred tool in this category by a wide margin. The two other serious options, ShellJS (14,399 stars) and execa (7,586 stars), take completely different philosophies about what &amp;ldquo;scripting in Node&amp;rdquo; should mean.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
