berenger.mo...@neutralite.org writes: > Le 09.07.2014 15:40, Mark Carroll a écrit : >> Martin Read <zen75...@zen.co.uk> writes: >> >>> On 09/07/14 05:07, Steve Litt wrote: >>> [regarding double fork] >>>> In other words, it's going to bust my program, right? >>> >>> Maybe. Do the programs you launch need to outlive your session? If >>> so, >>> your launcher program's design will run into problems in a systemd >>> world. >>> >>> If not, you should be fine. >> >> Hang on, that sounds scary. I'll still be able to launch something >> from the shell (maybe in an xterm) with a trailing & to put it in >> the background, and then log out and it will keep on going, right? >> >> I may not have been paying enough attention ... (snip) > I thought that, currently, if you close the parent of "something" you > have started with '&', "something" will die. > Do you speak about nohup instead?
Not knowingly. I ssh in to a machine with bash as my login shell, start something in the background, log out, log back in, and it's still running. For instance, mtbc@samuel:~$ sleep 12345 & [1] 4052 mtbc@samuel:~$ exit logout Connection to samuel closed. but reconnect later and, mtbc@samuel:~$ ps awux | grep sleep mtbc 4052 0.0 0.0 5792 352 ? S 22:08 0:00 sleep 12345 mtbc 4138 0.0 0.1 8028 836 pts/3 S+ 22:08 0:00 grep sleep Will systemd change that? Maybe it depends how "session" is defined. Or maybe ssh / bash are implicitly doing some nohup-like thing? -- Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/871ttujkzr....@ixod.org
