On Wed, 08 Jun 2016, Didier Kryn wrote: > Otherwise, I like the idea to have a better control of what > survives a session.
I also like that and I like that is simply made. For many of us is already made possible in simple ways: you run inside screen (or even better tmux, having read screen's code) the processes you want to survive. All the rest shall die on logout. I use the ZSh shell, which implements also good handling of exceptions with background processes: when you send to background and logout, warns you about it. If you explicitly 'disown' a process, it will keep running even after logout. Bash may have something similar. So I'm not sure the systemd developers deserve once again all the glory of reimplementing something that is already there and works for many. The only new thing is: they are breaking what already works to force people use their own system. After watching some presentations and considering the behaviour of their hooligans I just suspect there is a serious ego-maniac problem at the root, which is now starting to cash in on these disruptive pseudo-innovations and people talking about them. ciao _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
