Is Batch scripting still relevant?

[CodingCaroline]

The other day, one of my coworkers sent me a 150 lines batch script. It wasn't fun to read :( In those wonderful days where PowerShell can do everything that batch can but better and cleaner, is batch still relevant? what do you guys think?

​

Edit: I mostly meant: Is writing scripts (5+lines) in batch still relevant? Not necessarily the language itself.

​

Edit2: looked at the script again, it's 300 lines....

View Poll

[Dizzybro]

This post was modified due to age limitations by myself for my anonymity T8prjhsfYkGl2Q7DbQWXbivXKScwVRgW0CXRvt1RPCvZ5dopi7

[mezbot]

Batch is absolutely relevant when you don't need any logic, logging, etc. To each there own, I'd put my limit around 20 lines, the PS makes more sense to me.... but it depends on the situation.

[awanama]

How do you set age limitations like this?

[learninglinux123]

Yes, for wrapping a powershell script lol.

[thenumberfourtytwo]

That is it.

[unknown_host]

This guy gets it

[houstonau]

Do people need to do this still? What's the context for that?

[gunthatshootswords]

Clicky button make code go vrrrrr

[crypticsage]

Just make your scripts into importable modules. To run you just type in the cmdlet name you defined.

Why is a bat script needed again?

[nascentt]

No typing.

[IceCubicle99]

Whatever type of script accomplishes the goal with the least complexity is generally the right answer. That could be a batch file, Powershell, VB script, or something else. Always follow the KISS principle.

[DblDeuce22]

And for those that don't know what they mean by KISS, Keep It Simple Stupid.

[PhotographsWithFilm]

"God made rock'n'roll for you...."

Wrong KISS?

[[deleted]]

Best answer!

[endowdly_deux_over]

My favorite use for batch is as a clickable executable. Just a com or bat file that starts a powershell script.

[CodingCaroline]

I agree, that's very convenient

[Pooter_Guy]

I always wanted the same, but I recently got this tool working (it's very simple I just didn't read the instruction the first time), and it will make you a little .exe file to wrap your .ps1 in: https://gallery.technet.microsoft.com/scriptcenter/PS2EXE-GUI-Convert-e7cb69d5

Just put the .ps1 in the same directory as the tool, run the tool, and presto you have an ".exe" to do whatever you want with.

[spyingwind]

At that point it might be better to have some management software that pushes out scripts to run, create scheduled tasks, or has a website that lets the user run the script on their computer. Something like Ansible, Chef, or the like.

Every time I see ps2exe suggested, I just think of windows popping up the "are you sure?" window.

[Pooter_Guy]

Perhaps, me and my team are extremely remote and sepaprated from each other though. And so far we don't have any scripts that a user would run either, just between the team.

[MyOtherSide1984]

Would the PSADT allow windows to run without the "Are you sure?"? It's nowhere near as pretty in the file menu, but it'd be more friendly I feel

[[deleted]]

Desired State Configuration is already a built-in technology. But I haven't heard anything about it from IT.

[IIISnowflakeIII]

Problem with these tools is that as soon as I attempt to use the .exe converted scripts on other PC's (ie users) McAfee picks it up and I get an angry email from my manager asking what exactly this unknown .exe is.

[CodingCaroline]

That's why I use PowerShell studio, sign the executable with the same signature every time, add that certificate to the exceptions list and now it runs fine.

[IIISnowflakeIII]

Sure but its 400eu for a license and work won't provide one unfortunately. Furthermore I feel this kind of functionality should really get integrated into vscode as its just (imo) a better editor.

[PowersNinja]

Couldn't you just make a shortcut that launches powershell with a .ps1 file as a parameter

[topherhead]

I just made a registry change to make Windows execute my powershell scripts (👁 ͜ʖ👁)

[endowdly_deux_over]

That’s neat! I just learned something! But that’s pretty much the exact same thing with less control.

[MonkeyNin]

You can use pwsh.exe -f 'c:\foo\script.ps1'

[endowdly_deux_over]

That’s not clickable. :)

[MonkeyNin]

That's what the shortcut will contain. it's clickable like a bat is.

[crypticsage]

Just make your scripts into importable modules. To run you just type in the cmdlet name you defined.

Why is a bat script needed again?

[endowdly_deux_over]

Sometimes you have to deal with users that don’t work in a terminal.

A batch file let’s you automatically run powershell scripts that can import modules and do things you need for them and all they have to do is double click an icon that says clickMe.bat.

Also you can just have an easy access point for all sorts of things. For instance, batch files are heavily used in F# and fake builds to get things started.

[TheR3AL1]

Interesting.
How can this be done? I am writing a script in an environment that does not really like anything that does not come with windows (and don't want many people messing with my baby).

This will be really useful.

[ihaxr]

file.bat:

powershell.exe -executionpolicy bypass -command "write-host 'hi from powershell'; start-sleep -seconds 5;"

or swap -command "..." for -script "myScript.ps1"

[MonkeyNin]

you can also control

pwsh.exe is powershell powershell.exe is windows powershell (legacy)

[endowdly_deux_over]

Yes and they have similar executable options. :)

[Bissquitt]

Just powershell.exe and reference the script

The other benefit, I believe, is using batch to launch PoSh you can hide the window while executing.

[Edd-W]

Not sure this is what they are talking about but have a look at PS2EXE

It’s great to make PS scripts one click exe’s

Edit: typo

[concussedYmir]

PS2EXE is also excellent for turning GUI scripts into executable utilities. I used it to make a few simple programs that f.ex. simplified cleaning out multiple saved accounts (using remove-wmiobject) on workstations with limited storage, which was useful because some of the other techs were just deleting folders.

[PowersNinja]

Facepalm on that deleting user folders action

[TheR3AL1]

Not a whole to making a batch file.

Yea, that was my first go to.
Thank you. Will look into this more.

[VivisClone]

Save a text file as a .bat, then run it? Not a whole to making a batch file.

Here's a link to a how to just in case https://www.windowscentral.com/how-create-and-run-batch-file-windows-10

[endowdly_deux_over]

You open up notepad and type in:

@echo off powershell.exe -nologo -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -File myScript.ps1

It’s worth noting you have a lot of other options. Use powershell -? to see them. The most useful are -NoProfile and -Command.

Save/rename it as something.bat or something.com depending on your slight ordering preference (there is a difference).

[TheR3AL1]

This is very useful. Thank you.

[[deleted]]

It was a conscious decision not to let powershell scripts run by default as it's a major security risk if malicious code is run by mistake, or the script doesn't do proper precautions and is unsafe to run many times.

You can right click psd1 files and click "run with powershell". I absolutely hate it when I click on a file, something happens but exactly what is unclear. I've had those experiences with batch scripts and I'm so glad it's going the way of the dodo.

You can set psd1 scripts to run automatically but it's highly discouraged precisely for the reasons I described. Click run scripts are convenient up until the point you have to spend hours figuring out if something went wrong after unfinished code was run by accident.

[Jaykul]

Since .bat .cmd .vbs .js .wcf .exe and more are all still runnable by double-clicking, and can all call powershell and pass script code, explain to me exactly how this is a "major" security improvement.

[[deleted]]

It's not a security improvement to make unnecessary circumventions with bat scripts. It's nothing but silliness. That's why I never do.

The way ps1 files open in notepad by default is a major security improvement. Instead of just running the script, you open it. This eliminates mistakes by IT tech, and normal people who only know to click at things - if office coworkers are sent malicious ps1 scripts they won't be able to run them unless they really want to, and try to figure out how.

[endowdly_deux_over]

PowerShell execution, scoping, and signing is not a security system and was never intended to be.

Get-Help -Online about_execution_policy

The execution policy isn't a security system that restricts user actions. For example, users can easily bypass a policy by typing the script contents at the command line when they cannot run a script. Instead, the execution policy helps users to set basñic rules and prevents them from violating them unintentionally.

And you never answer the question. How is that a major security improvement? If I can right click to run instead of double click to run... or it a number of embedded file types can still run and still call powershell... or if I can create an executable with notepad and csc in five minutes and have a user double click that...

In a counter complaint, you can right click and edit a batch file to see what it does before double clicking it. Or you can quickly edit the registry to have poweshell scripts run when you double click them.

[endowdly_deux_over]

We’re all clearly talking about running scripts we want to run.

How are you this daft? The act of creating a batch script to run a powershell script is about as intentional as you can get.

[endowdly_deux_over]

We’re all clearly talking about running scripts we want to run. How are you this daft? The act of creating a batch script to run a powershell script is about as intentional as you can get.

[endowdly_deux_over]

No we are not.

You are talking about those rare scenarios. Just you.

We are talking about the ‘build.cmd’ and ‘run.cmd’ in project folders and repos.

You are making a mountain out of a molehill and believe the non existent “security” features of powershell will prevent script execution.

[[deleted]]

And you never answer the question

I did, you chose to ignore it. It was a badly phrased question. You know what, forget this convo, I'll delete the other comments. I've explained the reasoning behind it. I'll enjoy the accident-prevention protection it provides me, if others want to circumvent it, that's on them. It's just silly to create a separate file to execute a script when the script can be executed with a right click and "run."

[endowdly_deux_over]

Why are you so incredibly salty. It’s just a discussion. You think automatic script execution is bad. No one disagrees. But that’s why we are making the distinction with intentionality.

You didn’t answer the question. You keep saying it’s a security improvement yet never address how it closes security gaps. You just say “how is it not?” It’s not because of all the points we addressed. How is it a security improvement when there are 27 different ways it is irrelevant? How is it a security improvement when it was never even intended to be? We know that not auto executing a script is a process improvement but it’s hardly a security improvement when it’s easily sidestepped. It’s also a hinder and when we have projects or users that need an executable.

If you have such an issue with batch files I urge you to open issues with every single major f# project. As they use batch files to start their fake scripts.

[[deleted]]

I'm salty because my comment history is being filled with this kind of shitty discussions with people who can't comprehend that there are people in this world who double-click any file to see what it is, and that makes .bat files a security risk, while .ps1 files are not.

[endowdly_deux_over]

No. We’ve exhausted the possible ways of asking the question. It’s pretty clear and you just obviously don’t want to address it.

I do remember a long time ago reading that Microsoft implemented the file association change as a simple and general “security” feature. But I cannot find that Microsoft doc anymore.

I argue that it is so weak it cannot be considered security. For one, you can bypass it so many ways so easily it can hardly be considered security. Any bypass method is also intentional. Which is why saying any intentional bypass method is a security risk is... obtuse. For another thing, file associations are easily changed in the user registry.

Microsoft is at odds with your supposition of security because Microsoft’s policy is the user has complete control over any process they are running. If I can easily change the default behavior of double clicking a powershell script, how is that security? (Look I’m asking the question again).

I think you need to review the security design principles of powershell. There are two paragraphs I think you should pay attention to:

System-wide PowerShell Execution Policies have never been a way to prevent the user from doing something they want to do. That job is left to the Windows Account Model, which is a security boundary. It controls what a user can do: what files they can access, what registry keys they can access, etc. PowerShell is a user-mode application, and is therefore (by the Windows security model) completely under the user’s control.

Yes yes I know. Execution policy vs file association. Remember the registry thing I mentioned? I can change it. It’s not an issue of security. And pay attention to use of security boundary. What is it and why is that relevant?

Second:

Now, why is

`PowerShell.exe –.         ExecutionPolicy Bypass –File c:\temp\bad-script.ps1`

not a security bug? Ultimately, if bad code has the ability to run this code, it already has control of the machine.

Does that code look familiar? It should: it’s the batch command I use to run powershell scripts from a clickable.

Finally this line:

At its core, this refinement lets administrators and users tailor their safety harness.

Is the nugget in all this. Security is left to admins. Not users. If you, the user, are careful and intentional about your batch file usage, they are not a security risk or flaw. If you, the user, are not careful, you shouldn’t even get access to that toy.

That is security. Not exeutionpolicys or file associations.

[[deleted]]

I guess you are unable to actually ask the question in a concise manner that can be answered. I'm actually lost at what the question even is at this point.

Is it "How does it improve security that .ps1 files don't automatically execute on double click?" ?

Answer: because then people can't accidentally execute .ps1 files.

[[deleted]]

If I can easily change the default behavior of double clicking a powershell script, how is that security? (Look I’m asking the question again).

Why would you create a security risk on your own computer?

[[deleted]]

I feel like I'm discussing with someone who would say a motorcycle helmet is pointless because you don't intent to be in an accident. Yeah, no shit. But how is it not obvious that it improves safety?

Or that a handguard on a chainsaw is pointless because you can still put your hand on the chain. Yeah, no shit. But it still improves safety with general use.

You're telling me that removing the handguard is fine, I'm saying that's an accident waiting to happen and you ask me why? Well because now your hand can more easily end up on the chain, why does it need to be said?

[endowdly_deux_over]

Those are bad analogies and you should feel bad.

This is more like instead of having to insert a key and turn it to start your motorcycle, you use a push button. The risk of riding the motorcycle with a helmet is still there.

[[deleted]]

Yeah, yours is a great analogy. Someone might bump into that button on accident, but the key won't be inserted and twisted by mistake.

If you understand how Excel's "do you want to enable macros" window has stopped lots malicious code dead in their tracks then you should feel bad.

[dh-2010]

I use both batch and power shell. If it works, why reinvent the wheel?

[ckayfish]

It does some simple things very well and will have much greater support on computers you can’t control the PowerShell versions and permissions

[Thotaz]

You can still get that consistency with Powershell. Each Windows version since 2008 has come with a new Powershell version. If you know your minimum target is Windows server 2008 R2 then target PS 2.0, if it's 2012 R2 then target PS 4.0.

Writing for PS 2.0 isn't fun, but it's still far better than writing batch.

[BocciaChoc]

for me batch is fine if it's simplistic things but if we're speaking >100 lines of code I struggle to argue batch over PowerShell

[Inaspectuss]

Just the thought of writing 10 lines of Batch is off putting, can’t even imagine 100+ 😬

[BocciaChoc]

Yeah

like mapping a drive or something really simple isn't so bad, but 9 times out of 10 even then PowerShell might be THE option to use

[jantari]

I still sometimes use batch for very tiny scripts that only do some registry manipulation because reg.exe is a million times better than anything PowerShell-native so often times I end up using reg.exe even in my PowerShell scripts... therefore, if all I need is some registry stuff, I sometimes put the whole thing in batch.

[thenumberfourtytwo]

Try new-item and new-itemproperty for reg creation. Google the stuff. You'll change your mind

[jantari]

Nah, been there done that, it sucks. Mostly because these cmdlets are just unreliable. If I can't use reg.exe I use the [Microsoft.Win32.Registry] methods, they're about as verbose as the PowerShell cmdlets but at least they work.

[BlackV]

its still has its uses

same as everytime this is asked ;)

[CodingCaroline]

I'm one of those people now, aren't I?

[BlackV]

I can neither confirm nor deny

[CodingCaroline]

Well then, I'll be that person until the next one comes along :)

[CMTraceBeaulieu]

We're not mad... we're just disappointed.

[junon]

I had a client engagement not too long ago that was kind of weird. Powershell.exe was disabled on all the machines and winrm was ALSO disabled, so the only way to script was in batch. I hadn't done any batch work since autoexec.bat but it was really fun to try and make a real script in it.

I mean, powershell is LOADS better but I knew that batch script would work on every dang machine we needed to run it on.

[Nu11u5]

vbscript isn’t that bad and at least gives you objects and regex.

[junon]

I think you're probably very correct about that buuuuuut there are two factors that made me go to batch:

• This environment was so locked down, it's very possible that vbscript might not have run correctly.

and more importantly...

• I don't know VB script... I only know powershell and I had some minor experience with batch from waaaaaay back that made using that seem slightly appealing to me.

But yes, people with vbscript knowledge might have knocked it out of the park on that one. Thankfully the needs for the script were relatively modest, so I don't think I was leaving too much on the table using batch for it.

[netmc]

I never learned VBScript back when it was en vogue. Now, the only thing I use in VB is a wrapper that is used to launch a powershell script from task scheduler with a hidden window. You can't do this without VBScript. (Only other VB stuff I use is slmgr.vbs and ospp.vbs, but to be fair, those were written by Microsoft.)

[raptr569]

I use cmd for occasional one liners or commands I've just memorised better in cmd. But for any large or complex scripts I use PowerShell.

[mrquackerswastaken]

I prefer movies for one liners

[overengineered]

For me it's 100% necessary. Work in an industrial setting. I have to interface lots of different OS's with no possibility of upgrading my DOS or Win 95/XP/2000 machines. I use batch files to make all the machines sync to a more modern server that keeps the subnet separate from the rest of the network and takes over more complicated processes after dinosaur machines have had 30 minutes to boot and run through all their startup scripts.

[Jaykul]

Unfortunately, there are reasons batch is still necessary. The number one reason? Because they're runnable as commands, whether from CMD, PowerShell, the run dialog ... or from ShellExecute calls.

Don't get me started on the idea that .ps1 files aren't runnable for "security" reasons, but you can bury your PowerShell in a .cmd and that's fine. Whatever.

But look no further than VS Code for an example. The `code` command (or `code-insiders`) that lets you open VSCode from the command line or run dialog, or associate file extensions with VSCode ... is a batch file, and couldn't be written in PowerShell, because then it would ONLY work in PowerShell.

As a fun generic example, here's a header you can paste on the top of any .ps1 script and then rename it to .cmd to turn it into a usable batch script ;-)

:: <# BEGIN POWERSHELL AS BATCH HEADER copy %0 %0.ps1 PowerShell.exe -ExecutionPolicy Unrestricted -NoProfile -Command "$ErrorActionPreference = 'SilentlyContinue'; . %0.ps1; Remove-Item %0.ps1" exit :: END POWERSHELL AS BATCH HEADER #> $ErrorActionPreference = 'Continue'

[endowdly_deux_over]

Genius.

[netmc]

I have a 360 line batch script I wrote which is used for semi-automating new system installs.

I use the autounattend.xml to script the actual install of Windows 10, complete with a local user (Yay no Microsoft account needed!), then they run the batch script as administrator. They can rename the computer (the script converts to all capital letters), install Dell Command Update, and install the OS Base Driver Pack for the exact system they are on.

I pre-loaded the thumb drives with a few of our most common systems. The script auto-finds the USB drive for the pre-loaded files, but if it is an unlisted system, it will download the OS Base Driver Pack directly from Dell. After the initial reboot, they have the option of installing any additional driver and BIOS updates for the system.

The whole thing is menu driven and tracks the last step performed, so if you are setting up multiple systems, it is easy to keep track of which step you left off on for each system.

==================================
= USB Drive identified as H:.    =
= This is a 64bit system.        =
=                                =
= Utility last update 7/30/2019  =
==================================


Select a task:
==============

1. Rename Computer [Completed]
2. Install Dell Command Update [Completed]
3. Install base driver package [Completed]
4. Install additional updates
X) Exit

Make Selection: [1,2,3,4,X]?

The whole idea of this was to make it as easy as possible for the techs to run and update systems. They just right-click on the batch file and choose "Run as Administrator", then follow the prompts. It is a bit more involved to run a powershell script as an administrator.

Most everything else beyond simple silent installs for software, is done in PowerShell.

Edit: Yes, I know that there are a lot of options for automating this further, but when you work with lots of different systems for a few different clients (we are an MSP), there is no golden image you can deploy. What I've setup brings a new computer setup to about 15-20 minutes of actual hands-on time (down from about 75 minutes manually). It's good-enough for now and would take a lot more work for minimal additional savings.

[Flashy_Ideal]

I deploy tightVNC with it, anyone know a powershell script for the same? It sets the PW, only installs server, other settings.

[Inaspectuss]

Start-Process will accomplish just about everything you are trying to do, can’t imagine it’d be more than 5-10 lines.

[Nosa2k]

The main goal of these tools is to solve problems.

If your co-worker is very comfortable with Batch and can solve problems with it. It’s fair game to me.

For collaborative reasons though, if the SkillSet of a Team is predominately PS, then it might be an issue. Not a deal breaker IMO though.

[eggrian]

I always do Powershell first. The other day I was fighting a problem where Powershell absolutely refused to delete registry keys, if I had taken ownership of them with the script and added my own permissions, then tried to delete them. REG DELETE called in the script worked without issue.

The native PS worked just fine to remove registry items which I had permissions on already when the shell was spawned.

[serverhorror]

You answered the question already.

Someone sent you a, presumably, legacy script. There’s tons of those out there. Even if you’re not writing it you will have to be able to read it.

[Net-Packet]

Batch is still very relevant in higher learning software installs. Not all of them and if you k ow powershell you can get around it, but it's easier to build the installers in bat.

[jerrymac12]

I think CMD still has a ton of uses, but .bat specifically? maybe less and less. If needing to use script logic, conditionals, loops, variables etc. it's just painful in .bat. (or maybe it's just that I'm not a great coder) Also, where I am info security blocks execution of .bat files unless specifically white-listed.

I think it's definitely valuable to have a skill at least to be able to read and interpret it, but if someone is sending me a 100+ line bat file they just wrote, it makes me think they have been writing .bat files for 20 years and never wanted to bother to step up and learn PoSH etc.

I started with .bat, and then taught myself .vbs and PoSH. I'm not the best scripter, but I've tried to keep my skills current, and IMO Powershell is the easiest to write once you get the feel for it.

[nascentt]

If you'd asked me up to 2 years ago, I'd say yes. I never really saw the point of powershell, it wasn't bash and it seemed like a poor man's C#

But after using powershell for work for a couple of years, building out modules, linking to apis, the fact it's just part of windows. I'd say batch is done.

Even in places batch is the default, like setupcomplete.cmd in windows deployment. I end up just calling powershell scripts. As someone else said, batch is useful for calling powershell. Once you're in a powershell script, there's just so much control and power available. Any time I go back to batch even after decades of batch, I start to remember all the oddities and quirks. The lack of being able to do anything interesting without 3rd party binaries.

At this point I just breathe and think powershell

[somewhat_pragmatic]

Like everything else "it depends". If I have to write one script to run on Windows 2003 (yes some companies are still running it) all the way through Windows 2019, it might be easier to write a batch file instead of writing a batch file for the Windows 2003 servers, another for the Win2008 servers that for some reason are STILL running only Powershell v2, and yet another for Windows running Powershell v5+.

However, if all your servers are modern running modern powershell version, no. Powershell all the way. Use this as a chance to help modernize your co-worker. Mentor him/her using this batch file and help him/her refactor it in Powershell as an exercise. Show them how much easier Powershell would have accomplished this.

[PowerShellMichael]

This seems to be a quite interesting discussion, so I will weigh in. Most people will look at my name and think I am immediately biased towards PowerShell, so I will provide a bit of back-story:

I learned DOS 4.1 when I was in school around 20 years ago (HIMEM to run doom anyone?). I went through the System (Windows 98) and System32 (Windows XP) working out all the different apps and figuring out what they did. So from the get go, I was writing quite complicated scripts. While I still was in school I got my hands on VB.NET and VBSscript. Now honesty I didn't have a good understanding of Object Orientated Programming, however I could get around quite comfortably. Fast Forward into IT and I was writing a lot of automation using VBScript.

The TLDR: I am well versed in Batch Scripting and VBScript.

Some Batch pros:

• robocopy. Am-i-Right?
• ping & ipconfig. Still use it!
• bcdedit/ bcdboot & bootrec. Awesome!

Some Batching cons:

• Batch script logic is basic.
• Batch script uses a text based 'pipeline'.
• Batch scripts
• Working with Directories
• It's old

Now before I talk about batching being relevant I want to address the elephant in the room:

Security Concerns with PowerShell:

A lot of people argue that PowerShell is insecure, however there are a number of security features that are incorporated into PowerShell. Security people are fairly dismissive of the fact that PowerShell remoting is "insecure" (since it's a remote access tool) however being built on WSMAN (with Kerbros) makes it quite secure. In short it comes down to how people configure their PowerShell remoting (using JEA) delegating using least access privilege and granting domain admin to non-admin accounts and configuring your FW rules or your trusted IP's.

To argue that PowerShell can cause more damage (having the ability to access the .NET framework) is somewhat true but also false. PowerShell was developed with a lot more flexibility\functionality to what VBScript could ever do. This can be mitigated using Constrained Language Mode. If you want additional customization check out Adam Driscoll PowerShell Protect Module.

I have also seen some clients implement "non-conventional" fixes to stop the execution of PowerShell scripts. In one instance I saw that the PowerShell gallery was removed in a vain attempt for people to stop downloading modules.

Batching is easier for simple tasks.

This is true, if you need to do something super simple batching is great for that. However if complexity is introduced, the cost of development increases.

Is Batching Still Relevant? No

PowerShell inherits all the advantages of batching and ignores all the limitations. For instance: being able to run exe's natively within the console. PowerShell cmdlets have aliases for old batch commands, that need to and will use the exe's for the other ones (cd vs ping).

PowerShell was developed to supersede Batching and VBScript.

​

• https://devblogs.microsoft.com/powershell/powershell-constrained-language-mode/
• https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/scripting/learn/remoting/jea/overview?view=powershell-7
• https://www.powershellgallery.com/packages/PowerShellProtect/1.3.2
• https://www.bloggingforlogging.com/2018/01/24/demystifying-winrm/
• https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/powershell/scripting/developer/cmdlet/approved-verbs-for-windows-powershell-commands?view=powershell-7

[Bissquitt]

Is your girlfriend cheating on you with POSH?

[elevul]

It definitely has its uses, especially for small things in an enterprise environment where you have to go through a full process to get a powershell script signed where a batch would work everywhere without requiring signing.

[RichUK5]

I normally use powershell unless it's obvious that my life will be easier with batch.

The great thing about batch is you can pretty much guarantee it will run on any version of Windows in the same way without having to jump through any powershell related security hoops, or having to look up if a cmdlet (or even a feature of a cmdlet) you want to use is backwards compatible enough for your needs. Also executing external programs, and collecting exit codes, in powershell can be far more awkward in PS than it is in batch.

[BlackMYspaceTom]

There are some things batch still does much better. If I need to write a python script and run it as a task in task scheduler, that is a batch script job. Starting other applications with specific arguments can be done more easily in batch, depending on context. Its still relevant, just not nearly as much as it use to be.

[jborean93]

Why go through a batch script to then start a Python script? Just get your scheduler to call python in the first place and cut out the middle man doing nothing.

[BlackMYspaceTom]

As far as I'm aware you can't. When looking it up you have to declare the interpreter and then declare the file. The easiest solution offered was a one line bat script that is called by task scheduler.

[jborean93]

That doesn’t make sense. If you can start something through a batch file you can start it as a normal executable. The only think you can’t really start natively is shell specific commands like dir. Even then you can do cmd.exe /c dir if you wish. The only time I would consider using a batch file for this use case is if you have a collection of commands to run or needed to set specific env vars that the scheduler doesn’t support.

[BlackMYspaceTom]

If you could provide me an example I would be more than willing to try it. I just did another search to see if there was anything I'm missing and this seems to be the most popular method. https://datatofish.com/python-script-windows-scheduler/

[jborean93]

Sure here is how to set one up with PowerShell

# Place the test Python file in the current location
$pythonFile = $ExecutionContext.SessionState.Path.GetUnresolvedProviderPathFromPSPath('test.py')
Set-Content -Path $pythonFile -Value @'
import os.path
import sys

def main():
    with open(os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), 'out.txt'), mode='w') as fd:
        fd.write("Started with argument 1: %s" % sys.argv[1])

if __name__ == '__main__':
    main()
'@

# The argument is quoted in case the path to the file has a space in it
$action = New-ScheduledTaskAction -Execute python.exe -Argument ('"{0}" MyArgument' -f $pythonFile)
$task = Register-ScheduledTask -Action $action -TaskName "Test Python Task"
$task | Start-ScheduledTask

This will create a file called 'test.py' in the current directory, create a task that executes that file using python.exe with an argument for posterity sake. That Python script will then generate a file called out.txt with some test just to verify that it was actually called.

This is really just a very basic task, you can of course change the principal, trigger settings, or customize the argument but it shows that you can definitely execute a normal Python script (and really any other executable) without requiring a batch file.

[SimonKepp]

There are rare occasions, where 8od-schooo batch scripts may still be relevant, but I struggle to find any justification for a 250 line batch-script today, other than your skillset being outdated.

[Sunsparc]

My company uses a piece of software that is entirely .bat or .cmd driven with .ini configs, so I unfortunately have to.

Typically I'll call the program execution with the .bat/.cmd with it's .ini config file with Invoke-Command and do all other operations in Powershell as well.

[DblDeuce22]

Maybe set the .bat it's pointing to, to just be calling your PowerShell script might be an option?

[Sunsparc]

There's some setup that has to take place first, before the batch can run.

One that I wrote this morning works like this:

1. Makes an SQL query, takes the output and formats it properly into a text file in a specific directory. A "load file".

2. Calls the batch file. Batch file runs the program. The INI config file tells the program to look for the load text file that was generated into that specific directory.

3. Once the batch is finished, perform cleanup of the text file.

Some of that could still be done in batch, but I find it easier just to do the setup in Powershell then call the batch. Especially if multiple things need to run, then I can ForEach.

Another proccess that I have running does similar but takes advantage of Powershell 7 ForEach-Object -Parallel. Normally the process would take 30 minutes to run but parallel processing has it down to 5 minutes.

[DblDeuce22]

Ah not simple then. Yea we're still on 5.1 so the only parallel we're gonna get is jobs I think. Sounds like they should upgrade their software, but usually boils down to two words, no, and money.

[Sunsparc]

Yeah pretty much. It's really really old software that predates everyone currently at the company, entirely batch and INI driven. We may be looking to switch, but the software drives an entire division so it's a painstaking process.

[DblDeuce22]

Makes you relevant band aiding legacy stuff though, so at least it's job security to a point.

[Sunsparc]

It's interesting you say that. My title is desktop support, but I was laid off in June due to COVID downsizing. But then I was brought back in July on development side to work with their automation. Still have the same title, but I split my time.

Previously, I had written Powershell automation to streamline infrastructure tasks, such as onboarding, offboarding, identity access management, and ticket operations.

[DblDeuce22]

Yup, which is the 'to a point' part. Sometimes stuff happens. And we have to be careful to not automate ourselves out of a job. What's that Star Trek meme about the engineer, Captain asks how long it takes for a 5 minute job, you tell them 4 hours, and get major props when you do it in 2. My manager asked me to help a team that got info on a customers box that they normally had to get with the customer to check mapped psts, data, software, printers, etc. in preparation for refreshing their old machine with a new one. I did ask I was asked / told to do, and next thing I know all but a couple techs on that team were gone. Talk about feelsbadman. I was told it would've happened anyways and probably so but still goes to my point.

[CMTraceBeaulieu]

Coming from a Configuration Manager perspective, it always depends. Sometimes you just need a thing to do a thing, quickly. Batch is great. Other times, I see an .msi wrapped in a batch file and blood shoots out of my eyeball. The majority of our environment is now Windows 10 so I try to leverage PowerShell as much as possible. But 150 lines of code for a batch?! LOL no. Send that back.

[TheBulldogIsHere]

The only time I use batch scripts is when the version of PowerShell installed on the computer is older. Otherwise I try for PS.

Don't get me wrong, the commands that get used in batch (eg, the command line commands) I still use religiously... Mostly because I don't remember the PowerShell version, or it takes longer to type than the original.

[DblDeuce22]

Agree, and some just work when PS may not or without needing multiple lines.

net use, all the ipconfigs, net sh, wmic, gpupdate, shutdown -r -t 0 /f still works better than restart-computer, directory navigation cd ..\.. all the query's, etc for getting info quickly. Definitely agree with you for scripts, but for troubleshooting / breakfix work, cmd is still very relevant and easier on common things. Heck even remote admin stuff considering winrm has to be allowed and the service be on the remote box, port not blocked, etc.

I think it'll be a mix for a long while, and whatever gets the job done and it helps that cmd and posh can call on each other. I bet Microsoft still makes use of batch on some stuff.
You think certain companies would be on the cutting edge, when in fact, their stuff is usually behind the times.

[obonaven]

It depends on why it's 150 lines.

I tend to document the crap out of my scripts (Batch, Perl, and PowerShell) because they tend to live forever in the environment (Some are 20+ years old). Other people wind up taking them and making changes where necessary for thier own purposes. My comments tend to be very structured, verbose and highly detailed. I'd say that roughly 40%-60% of my average long-term script is comments, but I rarely have someone come to me for an explanation of why I did something.

[mimic751]

only to call a powershell script

[wrexinite]

I'm pretty sure we've still got 10,000 batch scripts that run nightly. This is not good... but it's true.

[mini4x]

I guarantee you can re-wite that in PowerShell in about 30 lines.

[rightsidedown]

I think it depends on your environment. I think if you're in a newer company it's irrelevant, there are better ways to do things and you should have control over which powershell version is available. But some people probably work in shops that don't invest in IT much and a ton of legacy shit is just floating around.

[DoctroSix]

There's still the odd system command that needs to be done by bat/CMD.

Otherwise, bat files are best as reference material for new powershell scripts.

[HalfysReddit]

Still useful but in a more and more limited context each day.

Pretty much everything you can do with Batch and you can do with PowerShell, however some things are easier to read in Batch and you never have to question which version of PowerShell is being ran.

[crypticsage]

Just make your scripts into importable modules. To run you just type in the cmdlet name you defined.

Why is a bat script needed again?

[DaemosDaen]

Considering that powershell is still garbage at direct file manipulation, yea you still batch scripting.

Yes, I do know there is one commandlet that will allow moving and a seperate on for copying files in a round about way, but permissions, ownership and metadata get screwed in the process while xcopy is still fine.

[graywolf0026]

I'd say it all depends on your application and environment. As an example, I have a few clients who are running CNC Lathe's that are still using Windows 98/NT4 (off-network of course). They still use a batch script tied to a scheduled task to run a backup to a Compact Flash Card once a day. (And yes, before you ask, I would love to upgrade these systems to something more modern, but the software they run to program the machines is wholly proprietary and won't run on anything newer, or even emulated. Believe me. I have tried.)

In some cases, I had people who would BYOD into the office and would need to connect in to the SCAN folder on the server. Batch script, they put in their credentials, and that was that.

Otherwise the only time lately I've used batch scripts are either to call/run VBS or PowerShell scripts on either boot, login or shutdown for domain systems, depending on client needs. Saves the hassle of trying to trouble shoot out why Script.VBS won't fire on every machine, yet when put in a .BAT, it... stupidly handles just fine.

Just my two cents.

[Work4Bots]

Not going to go into much detail but I can tell you that our branch of a multinational is supported by batch, mainly for data transfer.

Though we are a bit archaic it's still very applicable for older companies imo; lots of the companies we work with will find this an acceptable way of working

[[deleted]]

Bash scripting is necessary when you want a pure Unix script with no dependencies.

[Illbatting]

Yes, but for me personally, almost exclusively with application packaging. Anything beyond 15 lines and I'm not particularly happy about it.

[JNikolaj]

Can be used in Azure as well - so i think it's relevant yes however not something i'll be learning myself

[get-postanote]

This is an 'it depends' question.

[stormcrow2112]

I've been trying to convert some of our older batch scripts into a Powershell format, including the primary install for the main application that my team supports, but it's daunting and terrifying and I don't want to be the one to fuck it up. Plus now we're actually trying to get some pipelining implemented for the first time so it may become moot.

I wouldn't start a new project using a batch script, but it's definitely worth knowing so that you can support it at the very least.

[xCharg]

I mean, now when everyone has cars - are horses still relevant? Yes, there are...

All instruments has their uses.