What is the difference between executing a Bash script like A and sourcing a Bash script like B?

> ./myscript

> source myscript

7 Answers 7


Both sourcing and executing the script will run the commands in the script line by line, as if you typed those commands by hand line by line.

The differences are:

  • When you execute the script you are opening a new shell, type the commands in the new shell, copy the output back to your current shell, then close the new shell. Any changes to environment will take effect only in the new shell and will be lost once the new shell is closed.
  • When you source the script you are typing the commands in your current shell. Any changes to the environment will take effect and stay in your current shell.

the "environment" are things like the current working directory and environment variables. also shell settings (among others history and completion features). there are more but those are the most visible.

Use source if you want the script to change the environment in your currently running shell. use execute otherwise.

If you want more details please read on.


To clarify some common confusion about the syntax to execute and the syntax to source.

Syntax to execute:


This will execute myscript provided that the file is executable and located in the current directory. The leading dot and slash (./) denotes the current directory. This is necessary because the current directory is usually not (and usually should not be) in $PATH.


This will execute myscript if the file is executable and located in some directory in $PATH.

Syntax to source:

source myscript

This will source myscript. The file need not be executable but it must be a valid shell script. The file can be in current directory or in a directory in $PATH.

. myscript

This will also source myscript. This "spelling" is the official one as defined by POSIX. Bash defined source as an alias to the dot.

and for completeness:

exec myscript

This will terminate the current shell and then execute myscript in place of the terminated shell. That means when myscript is done there no shell to return to. exec is powerful but rarely needed.

I put some links at the end for more information on these topics.


Consider myscript.sh with following content:

# demonstrate setting a variable
echo "foo: "$(env | grep FOO)
export FOO=foo
echo "foo: "$(env | grep FOO)
# demonstrate changing of working directory
echo "PWD: "$PWD
cd somedir
echo "PWD: "$PWD

Before we execute the script first we check the current environment:

$ env | grep FOO
$ echo $PWD

The variable FOO is not defined and we are in the home directory.

Now we execute the file:

$ ./myscript.sh
foo: FOO=foo
PWD: /home/lesmana
PWD: /home/lesmana/somedir

Check the environment again:

$ env | grep FOO
$ echo $PWD

The variable FOO is not set and the working directory did not change.

The script output clearly shows that the variable was set and the directory was changed. The check afterwards show that the variable is not set and the directory not changed. What happened? The changes were made in a new shell.

The kernel spawned new shell to run the script. The input and output of the new shell is connected to the current shell. But other than that it is a own separate shell. The script is running in the new shell and all changes to the environment take effect in the new shell. After the script is done the new shell is destroyed. All changes to the environment in the new shell are destroyed with the new shell. Only the output was printed in the current shell.

Now we source the file:

$ source myscript.sh
foo: FOO=foo
PWD: /home/lesmana
PWD: /home/lesmana/somedir

Check the environment again:

$ env | grep FOO
$ echo $PWD

The variable FOO is set and the working directory has changed.

Sourcing the script does not create a new shell. All commands are run in the current shell and changes to the environment take effect in the current shell.

Note that in this simple example the output of executing is the same as sourcing the script. This is not necessarily always the case.

Another Demonstration

Consider following script pid.sh:

echo $$

(the special variable $$ expands to the PID of the current running shell process)

First print the PID of the current shell:

$ echo $$

Source the script:

$ source pid.sh

Execute the script, note the PID:

$ ./pid.sh

Source again:

$ source pid.sh

Execute again:

$ ./pid.sh

You can see that sourcing the script runs in the same process while executing the script creates a new process everytime. That new process is the new shell which was created for the execution of the script. Sourcing the script does not create a new shell and thus the PID stays the same.


Sourcing a script will run the commands in the current shell process. Changes to the environment take effect in the current shell.

Executing a script will run the commands in a new shell process. Changes to the environment take effect in the new shell and is lost when the script is done and the new shell is terminated.

Use source if you want the script to change the environment in your currently running shell. use execute otherwise.

See also:

  • 7
    One use of sourcing is creating a rudimentary form of configuration file for your scripts. You begin by setting various variables to default values, and then source in something like myscript.conf - and that sourced script can have assignment statements that override whatever values you want. Since the sourced script doesn't begin with #/bin/bash it isn't encouraged to execute it directly.
    – LawrenceC
    Jun 4, 2014 at 13:24
  • 5
    Is there a difference between using source myscript.sh and . myscript.sh?
    – Holloway
    Mar 17, 2015 at 9:37
  • 4
    practically no difference if using bash. source is an alias to dot in bash.
    – Lesmana
    Mar 17, 2015 at 22:02
  • 7
    I love it when people provide such elaborate examples so that even Linux newbies like myself can understand. Thanks!
    – Julius
    Sep 23, 2017 at 16:00
  • 1
    environment variables are not passed to scripts (or any process for that matter). they are "inherited". i looked for a text that explains that clearly but found none. this was the best i found: gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/… perhaps this will help you in your research: unix.stackexchange.com/questions/130985/…
    – Lesmana
    Mar 9, 2018 at 15:16

Executing a script runs it in a separate child process, i.e., a separate instance of shell is invoked to process the script. This means that any environment variables etc., defined in the script can't be updated in the parent (current) shell.

Sourcing a script means that it is parsed and executed by the current shell itself. It's as if you typed the contents of the script. For this reason, the script being sourced need not be executable. But it has to be executable if you're executing it of course.

If you have positional arguments in the current shell, they're unchanged.

So if I have a file a.sh containing:

echo a $*

and I do:

$ set `date`
$ source ./a.sh

I get something like:

a Fri Dec 11 07:34:17 PST 2009


$ set `date`
$ ./a.sh

gives me:


Hope that helps.

  • 9
    although this answer is correct in every way i find it very hard to understand because it is demonstrated using another concept (setting positional parameters), which is, in my opinion, even more confusing than the difference of sourcing and executing itself.
    – Lesmana
    Aug 16, 2010 at 18:35
  • It's funny... I actually like this was included. It's essentially the same as talking about env vars and such. It shows sourcing vs executing handles this differently too. I always knew about $PWD and env, but I didn't consider this fact, so for me, it's a plus, not a minus. May 10, 2023 at 19:15

sourcing is essentially the same as typing each line of the script in at the command prompt one at a time...

Execution starts a new process and then runs each line of the script, only modifying the current environment by what it returns.


In addition to above, executing the script as ./myscript requires execute permission for file myscript while sourcing does not require any execute permission. That is why chmod +x myscript is not required before source myscript

  • 4
    True, but if that's a problem, you can always run bash myscript.
    – Daniel Beck
    Feb 23, 2012 at 7:31

Sourcing you get all the extra variables defined in the script.
So if you have configs or function definitions you should source and not execute. Executions are independent from the parents environment.


If I recall correct, executing the script runs the executable in the #! line with the script file as an argument (typically starting a new shell and effectively sourcing the script into the new shell, as with #!/bin/sh);
whereas, sourcing the script executes each line in your current shell environment, which is useful to mutate your current shell (for example, providing a way to define shell functions and export environment variables).


source command executes the provided script (executable permission is not mandatory) in the current shell environment, while ./ executes the provided executable script in a new shell.

Also, check this answer for example: https://superuser.com/a/894748/432100

  • Part of this isn't true. You can use ./ with both sourcing and executing. That only means 'Get the file from the current working directory', ensuring you are getting the specific file you are expecting and not something found in your path. I believe what you are referring to is . someScript.sh (note the space between the period and the script) which is synonymous with source someScript.sh (and for that matter with source ./someScript.sh, although ./ isn't needed here because sourcing always expects a file. It's not searching the path for an executable.) May 10, 2023 at 19:23

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .