[haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- From: Travis Geiselbrecht <geist@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 00:03:55 -0700
On Aug 28, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Philippe Houdoin wrote:
Quoting Ingo Weinhold <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
I'd be all for it, too. I guess you suggest to enable the "shopt -s
huponexit" by default?
Well, either that or change the SIGHUP handling to leave existing
jobs
alone. I actually tend towards liking that stuff I fire up into the
background survives closing the terminal (as under BeOS). It would
also
avoid risking data loss (imagine you started an editor into the
background). But I suppose it mainly depends on what you're used
to...
+1 ("as under BeOS")
Now, nothing forbid us to add Terminal a new settings called "kill
all jobs on
close" or whatever could describe this more genocidal behavior
regarding child
processes...
As under BeOS by default, plus an extra feature via a setting. It
sounds very
much like Haiku to me.
Isn't there a very well defined way to deal with sessions, process
groups, etc? If a process wants to live beyond the session it's in,
it needs to detach itself from the group. Hopefully these new changes
are following the standard model for this, doesn't make any sense to
invent something new at this point.
Travis
- Follow-Ups:
- [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- From: Ingo Weinhold
- References:
- [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- From: Axel Dörfler
- [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- From: Ingo Weinhold
- [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- From: Philippe Houdoin
Other related posts:
- » [haiku-development] Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- » [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
Quoting Ingo Weinhold <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
I'd be all for it, too. I guess you suggest to enable the "shopt -s huponexit" by default?Well, either that or change the SIGHUP handling to leave existing jobsalone. I actually tend towards liking that stuff I fire up into thebackground survives closing the terminal (as under BeOS). It would alsoavoid risking data loss (imagine you started an editor into thebackground). But I suppose it mainly depends on what you're used to...
+1 ("as under BeOS")
Now, nothing forbid us to add Terminal a new settings called "kill
all jobs on
close" or whatever could describe this more genocidal behavior
regarding child
processes...As under BeOS by default, plus an extra feature via a setting. It sounds very
much like Haiku to me.
- [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- From: Ingo Weinhold
- [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- From: Axel Dörfler
- [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- From: Ingo Weinhold
- [haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- From: Philippe Houdoin