[haiku-development] Re: Bash and Jobs
- From: "Duane Ryan" <bailey.d.r@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:58:31 -0400
BTW, same difference in bash behavior on os x. The difference between the
two actions (on a guess) is that exit manages to preserve its child
processes on exit, while closing the terminal just kills it and its child
processes. So I think the easiest option is just to have closing the window
exit bash gracefully.
On 8/29/07, Ryan Leavengood <leavengood@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 8/29/07, Timothy Brown <stimbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Linux doesn't do it this way. The inconsistency is with haiku. Load up
> > an xterm in Linux using bash, run a background process like 'xclock &'
> > and then type 'exit'. Bash will tell you there are running processes and
> > take you back to the prompt.
>
> No it doesn't. At least not in Ubuntu or Fedora, which is all I have
> access to test. I tested both with xterm and GNOME terminal. I opened
> a terminal, typed 'xclock &', then 'exit', and the terminal closed but
> xclock stayed. Bash said nothing. But if I click the window close
> button xclock is closed. Hence, inconsistency.
>
> Maybe it works the way you describe is some other distributions. Ah,
> Linux consistency. It is probably just how bash is configured by
> default in each distro that makes the difference.
>
> BeOS also acts strange, as I recall. From what I can remember off hand
> (I haven't used it for development for a few weeks), whenever you
> close a terminal with child processes (like GVIM), the terminal just
> hangs until you close the child process. I don't think this is good
> behavior either.
>
> > I do accept,
> > however, that that is a very computer science based approach and may not
> > necessarily be the most obvious to an Average Joe.
>
> Well I suppose the argument could be made that the Average Joe won't
> ever be using the terminal, but that isn't for sure. In addition I
> went to school for computer engineering and still don't use your
> methods. I think we are even getting beyond computer science and into
> hardcore Unix geekery. No offense ;)
>
> > Either way, I believe 'exit' and closing the terminal should behave the
> > same, preferably with the option of changing the behavior if it is not
> > the way I like it :P.
>
> Now we agree on that point at least.
>
> Ryan
>
>
Other related posts:
